the latest from the right...

[Lance 228]

so i tune in to fox news today...they have this big thing going on with some Sen. King ® from IA and a bill that passed the house...they were trying to get some provisions attached to the bill, and along with it they tried to tie in pedophiles being excluded from a bill that provides some funding to prosecute hate crimes....

 

now...i'm sure it will take all of about 3 seconds once a few of you read this for you to have the bill posted here and explain what it "really" means and carry on with the "Obama is not president because he doesn't have a valid birth certificate" crap...but...anyway...i just found it funny that they said that the house passed this bill and didn't pass some other bill that dealt with veterans...the veterans bill was shot down beacuse it's being re-written to include MORE benefits for vets...the hate crime bill was passed as is because it had NOTHING to do with pedophiles...but for some reason the right wanted to get a specific line in there that excludes pedophiles...which if you did something like that you would have to exclude everything under the sun...kinda stupid...

 

SO..the part that I found the funniest was that the little stuff they put under the pic said "House dems pass bill that supports pedophiles, throw out bill that supports vets"....this is the exact sort of crap that the 'birth certificate" crowd loves to bounce around...it just cracks me up people can be so simple as to believe this sort of crap.

 

The news media has really gone downhill...both sides...CNN, MSNBC, Fox News...they are all junk.

 

that is all...

[Guest BEAVERTAIL]

now...i'm sure it will take all of about 3 seconds once a few of you read this for you to have the bill posted here and explain what it "really" means and carry on with the "Obama is not president because he doesn't have a valid birth certificate" crap"

 

this is the exact sort of crap that the 'birth certificate" crowd loves to bounce around...it just cracks me up people can be so simple as to believe this sort of crap.

 

Im about sick of it. All you do is bounce around that we all said that Obama wasnt born in the US. GO FIND WHERE ONE OF US SAID THAT.

 

Here is a link to help. http://www.swvasports.com/forum/showthread.php?t=14856&highlight=Obama+birth

 

And a some quotes from that link...

 

Now that being said, I don't support many of Obama's policies and certainly don't support the ones with which I morally disagree .....but he is our president for the next four years. We, conservatives, need to stand by our convictions and speak out on the issues by this current administration with which we totally disagree. (We've certainly heard many about the previous administration)

 

Exactly, but I think what the whole debate is about is whether or not Obama was born on American soil... And since his mother was not in the US for 5 years, and his father was not American, he has to be born on American soil. I cant imagine he wouldnt have been honestly.

 

However i would like to point out that this lawsuit has been brought up 3 times* before, all against Republicans. Maybe its time for the far right to have one...

 

*(None have been proven)

 

The saddest thing is that NUMEROUS times this has been tried by the Dems. Once again the door swings both ways.

 

If you think that saying, "the birth certificate crowd" is funny, its not. If you think it is going to destroy any of our credibility, its not. Let it go, you have nothing on us. Your whole story, and maybe one day I will look into it is ruined because you have to call out certain people or groups of people.

 

You destroy your own credibility before you even start.

[buzzsawBeaver 12]

So what benefits are veterans getting more of?

[Hacker 82]

I could not agree more about the media. All have given up the whole idea of objectivity. I avoid watching as much as possible.

[Lance 228]

Im about sick of it. All you do is bounce around that we all said that Obama wasnt born in the US. GO FIND WHERE ONE OF US SAID THAT.

 

Here is a link to help. http://www.swvasports.com/forum/showthread.php?t=14856&highlight=Obama+birth

 

And a some quotes from that link...

 

 

 

 

 

The saddest thing is that NUMEROUS times this has been tried by the Dems. Once again the door swings both ways.

 

If you think that saying, "the birth certificate crowd" is funny, its not. If you think it is going to destroy any of our credibility, its not. Let it go, you have nothing on us. Your whole story, and maybe one day I will look into it is ruined because you have to call out certain people or groups of people.

 

You destroy your own credibility before you even start.

 

lol...well at least you self-identified.

 

 

...and I wasn't talking about anyone in particular and not just here either...there was more talk of it on other forums...just saying there is that particular "crowd" of people who say all these types of crazy things that are obviously not true, yet they preach it like it's the law....if you don't belong to that "crowd" then don't worry about it as I was not talking about any one person here or elsewhere.

 

So what benefits are veterans getting more of?

 

not sure, from what they were saying it has something to do with benefits of the vets and family members after retirement...i know currently you have different points like 20 year and 30 year points where you get certain amounts of coverage for each, which has gone down over the past 10 years or so....they didn't really go in to it much just enough to somehow link it to the pedophile thing?

[Deleted Account 5,203]

I could not agree more about the media. All have given up the whole idea of objectivity. I avoid watching as much as possible.

 

You're not alone.

[bucfan64 307]

Objectivity died a long time ago, one has to dig through volumes of news stories from a variety of fringe sources to actually figure out what happened, regarding anything.

 

If I am interested in a story, I check out the CNN SPIN then I go view the FOX SPIN and then I hit some foreign papers and dig a little deeper.

 

It is indeed a shame, that all you can get is SUBJECTIVE REPORTING ......

[fieldgeneral 10]

so i tune in to fox news today...they have this big thing going on with some Sen. King ® from IA and a bill that passed the house...they were trying to get some provisions attached to the bill, and along with it they tried to tie in pedophiles being excluded from a bill that provides some funding to prosecute hate crimes....

 

now...i'm sure it will take all of about 3 seconds once a few of you read this for you to have the bill posted here and explain what it "really" means and carry on with the "Obama is not president because he doesn't have a valid birth certificate" crap...but...anyway...i just found it funny that they said that the house passed this bill and didn't pass some other bill that dealt with veterans...the veterans bill was shot down beacuse it's being re-written to include MORE benefits for vets...the hate crime bill was passed as is because it had NOTHING to do with pedophiles...but for some reason the right wanted to get a specific line in there that excludes pedophiles...which if you did something like that you would have to exclude everything under the sun...kinda stupid...

 

SO..the part that I found the funniest was that the little stuff they put under the pic said "House dems pass bill that supports pedophiles, throw out bill that supports vets"....this is the exact sort of crap that the 'birth certificate" crowd loves to bounce around...it just cracks me up people can be so simple as to believe this sort of crap.

 

The news media has really gone downhill...both sides...CNN, MSNBC, Fox News...they are all junk.

 

that is all...

 

Don't worry, we all lost our credibility when we weren't republican in many eyes. You're right, the media is awful. Most have taken sides and report things how they want them to and there are many many people who see it once on the ticker at the bottom of the TV and believe to be the GOD's honest truth. Just like some idiots running around saying that Obama isn't an American because of birth certificate , and Democrats are out for our guns. LET ME BE CLEAR! I AM NOT SAYING THAT YOU TAIL OR ANYONE HERE IS THIS GROUP!.....unless you believe these things. Just saying that a lot of our citizens are a little cracked when it comes to these things. Pretty sad actually that people believe everything they read w/o doing a little research as well as the media twisting things to fit their or someone's agenda......can anyone from Fox news please stand up? I know it's not only fox, but they've been hardcore repub for some time. NBC, CNN, all of them are in that direction!

[buzzsawBeaver 12]

Just like some idiots running around saying that Obama isn't an American because of birth certificate , and Democrats are out for our guns. LET ME BE CLEAR! I AM NOT SAYING THAT YOU TAIL OR ANYONE HERE IS THIS GROUP!.....unless you believe these things.

 

Military personnel aren't idiots.

2nd you yourself wrote "no one needs an ak47", did you not?

If you think that liberals and their socialist government rule agenda aren't "eventually" going to go after guns you are delusional. The key word is eventually, and pro gun America is being "proactive" to prevent it at every level possible before it starts.

[bucfan64 307]

The president is on the verge of signing a treaty with Mexico, this international treaty is designed to prevent the trafficking of arms across borders, wow suddenly we care about the border. Anyhow, if the president signs this treaty it will have MAJOR implications regarding American gun ownership.

 

Basically, it works like this, instead of passing legislation, which would probably fail, the president and his cronies are going to sign the treaty as a way of going around the Constitution. Once the treaty is signed America will then receive TREMENDOUS international pressure to adhere to the treaty as well as any changes that may be made to this treaty.

 

For example if and when the rest of the countries honoring this treaty decide to put added changes with it, they will then turn to America and say "o.k it's time for you to do so as well..."

 

These changes and the treaty itself is unconstitutional!

 

The liberals will then say, hey everyone else is doing it why not us, and thusly they will be able to find a loop hole around the constitution.

 

This is their plan to TAKE GUNS AWAY. It is real and anyone that doesn't believe it is foolish for thinking otherwise.

[Lance 228]

no treaty will ever override the constitution...the only way they can "take guns away", especially after last years supreme court ruling...is to change the constitution...and that is not going to happen...ever....they may ban certain kinds of guns...which, that is another issue...but they will never "take your guns away" without making a change to the constitution.

 

the whole "take your guns" thing is a political tool...nothing more.

 

where were all of you guys when Bush was signing in the PATRIOT Act? You want to talk about American rights being taken away hand over fist...start there.

[buzzsawBeaver 12]

Much of my concern is about their eventual attempts to ban certain types of weapons, as you stated that's another argument, but only sort of, not only is that wrong and unconstitutional, it's never "just those" in these types of situations, it's "just those till they are successful", then they won't intend to stop there, especially not after being successful before. There's other ways to go about it to, such as putting a ridiculously high tax on ammunition.

bucfan is correct about anti gun agenda's from outside the country, in my opinion the most vocal against an armed America would likely be europe, that is if the socialist agenda has it's way and the country aligns with europe. But it will likely take more than 1 term, perhaps if we're fortunate even 2 terms of this extreme socialist liberalism to get close to that point.....

[bucfan64 307]

no treaty will ever override the constitution...the only way they can "take guns away", especially after last years supreme court ruling...is to change the constitution...and that is not going to happen...ever....they may ban certain kinds of guns...which, that is another issue...but they will never "take your guns away" without making a change to the constitution.

 

the whole "take your guns" thing is a political tool...nothing more.

 

where were all of you guys when Bush was signing in the PATRIOT Act? You want to talk about American rights being taken away hand over fist...start there.

 

I agree the Patriot Act was a vile piece of legislation and it should not have been passed so easily. But if you don't believe that PRESIDENTIAL TREATIES cannot override the constitution look at NAFTA and furthermore, MANY OF THE TREATIES that have been signed with the U.N. have vented around the constitution.

 

Would you believe that we have CONSTITUTIONAL FREE ZONES IN AMERICA? We do, and we can thank the Patriot Act for that as well, even though it is legislation and not a treaty.

 

If you live within 100 miles anywhere near a U.S. Border, your rights under the constitution can be declared NULL AND VOID due to the Patriot Act.

 

There are a variety of approaches being taken to substitute U.N. treaty law for American law. It is called “norming.†Here’s how norming works. Left-wing groups go to the U.N. with their proposals, and get the U.N. to negotiate them as treaties. Then they come back to the U.S. Senate for ratification of the treaties and say, “You have to ratify the treaty. One hundred and eighty countries have already ratified it, how can the U.S. be isolated?â€

 

They nearly committed America to BILLIONS OF DOLLARS despite constitutional denial of such money, for the KYOTO agreement, but, we had enough fiscal conservatives in Washington at the time, to prevent America from being FORCED to give BILLIONS of dollars to a worthless piece of UN legislation that would have done nothing more than transferred wealth from AMERICAN TAXPAYERS to third world countries. Not too mention it would have regulated American factories further while still allowing Chinese and other "third world" countries to increase pollution.

 

This was a treaty and it would have went around the constitition. NAFTA was a treaty and it went around the constitution, I could probably name 100 more and might do so later when I have more time.

 

later,

[bucfan64 307]

would congress agree to "go around the constitution?: They know for example, that legislation restricting gun rights – infringing on the Second Amendment – would be very unpopular and very hard to get through Congress. They may want to do it to repay certain of their constituencies, but they know there would be a fight.

 

“If it comes in through the back door, where they can say, ‘Well, look, this is an international agreement,’ then it’s a lot easier to say we’re simply going along with something else that may have other benefits for the U.S.

 

and this is how the Constitution is gradually destroyed!

[fieldgeneral 10]

Military personnel aren't idiots.

2nd you yourself wrote "no one needs an ak47", did you not?

If you think that liberals and their socialist government rule agenda aren't "eventually" going to go after guns you are delusional. The key word is eventually, and pro gun America is being "proactive" to prevent it at every level possible before it starts.

 

Look, I respect any and all military personel for what they do for our country. I can promise you that not all of them are the smartest individuals and some are very bright. You can't say they are all "smart." I've known many in the military and some are down right stupid. Don't go and try to tell me that I am degrading our military because I'm not. Some people believe anything that is told to them. It's similar to being told something as a child and believing it to be the GOD'S honest truth. Some stay the same as an adult. So yes if you believe Obama isn't American and they are all out for your guns, then those people are IDIOTS in my book. YES , I said no one needs an AK47. They don't. You as an everyday citizen may need hunting guns and guns for protection, but we aren't trying to saw a deer or an intruder in half. I believe we have every right to own a gun, but if you've robbed a store or someone at gun point, then you have lost that right to me. Just my opinion.

[buzzsawBeaver 12]

Look, I respect any and all military personel for what they do for our country. I can promise you that not all of them are the smartest individuals and some are very bright. You can't say they are all "smart." I've known many in the military and some are down right stupid. Don't go and try to tell me that I am degrading our military because I'm not. Some people believe anything that is told to them. It's similar to being told something as a child and believing it to be the GOD'S honest truth. Some stay the same as an adult. So yes if you believe Obama isn't American and they are all out for your guns, then those people are IDIOTS in my book. YES , I said no one needs an AK47. They don't. You as an everyday citizen may need hunting guns and guns for protection, but we aren't trying to saw a deer or an intruder in half. I believe we have every right to own a gun, but if you've robbed a store or someone at gun point, then you have lost that right to me. Just my opinion.

 

I didn't suggest any level of intelligence about any of the people in the military, someone can be not the brightest person but still not be an idiot, and visa versa, but to label the military people in the military who question the president's oath as constitutional or unconstitutional is derogatory, but so be it that's on you.

 

I already know you wrote no one needs an ak47, so would you personally be agreeing with banning them and those types of weapons or not is the ?, because that conflicts with your statement about people being concerned for their 2nd amendment rights as idiots if you do.

 

But what exactly does having robbed a store or someone at gun point have to do with an ak or gun rights, felons already have gun restrictions, that has nothing to do with the majority of gun owners who aren't criminals...

[Deleted Account 5,203]

would congress agree to "go around the constitution?: They know for example, that legislation restricting gun rights – infringing on the Second Amendment – would be very unpopular and very hard to get through Congress. They may want to do it to repay certain of their constituencies, but they know there would be a fight.

 

“If it comes in through the back door, where they can say, ‘Well, look, this is an international agreement,’ then it’s a lot easier to say we’re simply going along with something else that may have other benefits for the U.S.

 

and this is how the Constitution is gradually destroyed!

 

To enforce restrictions on a Constitutional right, any act must meet the test of strict scrutiny.

1. Is there a substantial governmental interest?

2. Are there any less restrictive means?

3. Is the law/statute narrowly tailored to meet the substantial governmental interest.

 

If a law meets any of the three above, then it is Constitutional.

Thus, the waiting period/background checks on guns. Which are good things, IMO.

And both were sure popular enough to make them through legislatures...

 

But in reality, it's the judiciary that will eventually erode the Constitution.

They are the sole arbiters of it...

[fieldgeneral 10]

I didn't suggest any level of intelligence about any of the people in the military, someone can be not the brightest person but still not be an idiot, and visa versa, but to label the military people in the military who question the president's oath as constitutional or unconstitutional is derogatory, but so be it that's on you.

 

I already know you wrote no one needs an ak47, so would you personally be agreeing with banning them and those types of weapons or not is the ?, because that conflicts with your statement about people being concerned for their 2nd amendment rights as idiots if you do.

 

But what exactly does having robbed a store or someone at gun point have to do with an ak or gun rights, felons already have gun restrictions, that has nothing to do with the majority of gun owners who aren't criminals...

 

You made the statement that military personel are not idiots...saying that because SOME of them believe this or that would put them in my idiot group. I don't care what your job is, if you feel that the big bad dems are out for your guns and obama isn't an American, you're absurd and an idiot. That's just my opinion.

 

I have no problem banning semi automatic / automatic weapons that are not used for hunting or self protection. I hope that clears up the confusion. I don't think everyone CONCERNED with their 2nd amendment rights as an idiot. I only call those who are to the extreme idiots. I hear people all the time crying......the government wants to take my guns, and it's not that all.

 

robbing someone at gunpoint can be done using any gun or even at knife point whatever. However, a gun of that caliber is deadly even more so than a shot gun or pistol. I know , they are all deadly if used correctly, but less damage without an automatic machine gun etc. You seem to be an intelligent individual, so I assume that you know that criminals can get guns. At least if they are illegal, then they don't fall into the wrong hands....criminals and children.

 

I am completely in agreement with the fact that noone should have their guns taken from them and it's not what it's about at all! Just regulate the ones that our nations youth are killing each other with. The constitution was made a long time ago and the world has changed a lot since then. We have to amend to fit our times.

[Guest BEAVERTAIL]

 

I have no problem banning semi automatic / automatic weapons that are not used for hunting or self protection. I hope that clears up the confusion. I don't think everyone CONCERNED with their 2nd amendment rights as an idiot. I only call those who are to the extreme idiots. I hear people all the time crying......the government wants to take my guns, and it's not that all.

 

robbing someone at gunpoint can be done using any gun or even at knife point whatever. However, a gun of that caliber is deadly even more so than a shot gun or pistol. I know , they are all deadly if used correctly, but less damage without an automatic machine gun etc. You seem to be an intelligent individual, so I assume that you know that criminals can get guns. At least if they are illegal, then they don't fall into the wrong hands....criminals and children.

 

I am completely in agreement with the fact that noone should have their guns taken from them and it's not what it's about at all! Just regulate the ones that our nations youth are killing each other with. The constitution was made a long time ago and the world has changed a lot since then. We have to amend to fit our times.

 

 

FG, I see you dont know much about guns at all, and thats ok most dont.

 

I could just tell you to look at the years when automatic weapons were banned and then ask you to make a decision, cause obviously it didnt work.

 

But instead Ill just go through your last post. First, the argument with guns is very similar to Obama's stance on abortion. Obama wanted to kill children who were aborted and survived while he was in Ilinois legislation. One of his reasonings now, is that it would lead to all abortions being illegal, if they made the practice of killing the baby after it was born illegal and more legislation would push forward for more sanctions. As for the people who say their guns are being taken away, it is the same deal. You ban Ak47's (which btw your often reference is how i knew you knew very little about guns) then you ban all automatic and semi automatic weapons, and all with a capacity of over X, and then all ammo over Y grains etc. EXACT same reasoning from Obama and gun owners.

 

Secondly, I really wanted to ask you what guns to ban, because any answer you would give would allow there to be contradiction to what you believe. If you said all automatic weapons, then most self defense handguns would be illegal. But yet you say keep the ones for self protection, so that cant happen. Semi automatic weapons are regularly used for hunting. So where do you go from there? You have to ban magazines and capacities, which brings us back to the above that a number can be changed easily, and could eliminate many self defense guns.

 

Third, automatic weapons are NOT more dangerous than most weapons. In fact some are more some are less. AK47 has a cartridge of 7.69x39mm. Smaller than most deer ammo and pretty much pistol ammo. While it can shoot a decent distance, it loses energy fast and has a relatively small range. Often bullets do not penetrate through walls, which make it FAR less dangerous to pedestrians than other guns. Others like the AR-15, the by far most common automatic weapon will not penetrate walls as well and are commonly used for ground hog hunting (and they are addicting to shoot at the range). Every gun has a use, and an area for use and some single shot guns are by far more dangerous than AW.

 

Fourth, according to a study and book "Targeting Guns" by Gary Kleck, automatic weapons are used in 1-2% of all violent crimes. What is the point of banning these guns, while also having to ban other forms of these guns that are used for hunting and protection as well?

 

Lastly, Im not sure about the bold sentence above? If a criminal wants an AW to use in a crime, he will. It does not matter how. Black market, Mexico, stolen etc. He or she will get it. Making them illegal only allows us to charge them with another little crime after they have done their dirty deed. They can also acquire ones that arent traceable and fie serial numbers. But that is for another post.

 

The point is this, the Clinton gun ban failed to do what it said it would do for all of the reasons I posted above. We have tried this before, and it hasnt worked. Let people have their guns, I mean after all it is a constitutional right.

[Guest BEAVERTAIL]

Thus, the waiting period/background checks on guns. Which are good things, IMO.

 

Unfortunately, they do not work and never will. Will a criminal buy a gun that is traceable or where there is a background check? Nope. Will law abiding citizens? Yup.

 

So what good does a brackground check do? Makes me pay the state some money.

 

I know I have quoted this fact a MILLION times, but it deserves to be heard repeatedly. NY state implemented a law where the ballistics of every new handgun be shot and recorded in a database. Years later and THOUSANDS of handguns sold, that database has had 2 hits in all the violent crimes in NY state. No arrests have ever been made.

 

The proof is in the pudding that these things dont work, as good as they sound. I mean Im not against them neccessarily but when they take it further and raise prices for background checks and make all ammo traceable and making ammo unaffordable, I will raise cain because obviously it is not working.

[buzzsawBeaver 12]

You made the statement that military personel are not idiots...saying that because SOME of them believe this or that would put them in my idiot group. I don't care what your job is, if you feel that the big bad dems are out for your guns and obama isn't an American, you're absurd and an idiot. That's just my opinion.

 

 

 

It's obvious we'll never agree about the president's oath being constitutional, while I honestly never studied the matter beyond reading articles from each side myself, I have more confidence in the military movement that started the accusations than I do common liberals, or the people don't seem be able to think rationally in matters of this president, whoever that might be, but I remain in the middle of it and acknowledge that it's a mute point at this time and realistically anytime at this point....

[BigBlueAlum 12]

Unfortunately, they do not work and never will. Will a criminal buy a gun that is traceable or where there is a background check? Nope. Will law abiding citizens? Yup.

 

So what good does a brackground check do? Makes me pay the state some money.

 

I know I have quoted this fact a MILLION times, but it deserves to be heard repeatedly. NY state implemented a law where the ballistics of every new handgun be shot and recorded in a database. Years later and THOUSANDS of handguns sold, that database has had 2 hits in all the violent crimes in NY state. No arrests have ever been made.

 

The proof is in the pudding that these things dont work, as good as they sound. I mean Im not against them neccessarily but when they take it further and raise prices for background checks and make all ammo traceable and making ammo unaffordable, I will raise cain because obviously it is not working.

 

Actually, my best friend worked in sporting goods at Wal-Mart for a few years, and he told me a story once about a guy trying to buy a gun. When he called in the background check the agent told him to try to keep the guy in the store because he had a warrant out for his arrest and the cops were on the way. So he just acted like he was taking a long time to fill out all the paper work and the police showed up and arrested the guy.

 

Moral of the story...A lot of criminals are dumb.

[buzzsawBeaver 12]

"I have no problem banning semi automatic / automatic weapons that are not used for hunting or self protection. I hope that clears up the confusion. I don't think everyone CONCERNED with their 2nd amendment rights as an idiot. I only call those who are to the extreme idiots. I hear people all the time crying......the government wants to take my guns, and it's not that all."

 

As for the guns dispute, you made your position known, I guess people like myself shouldn't have any reason to have concerns about future fights for our 2nd amendment rights because by your very admission, you and your side don't want to ban my or anyone else's guns, you just want to tell me and the others which few guns we can have and the many types that we can't. Obviously it's not that at all....

 

 

 

 

"I am completely in agreement with the fact that noone should have their guns taken from them and it's not what it's about at all! Just regulate the ones that our nations youth are killing each other with."

 

We shouldn't have our guns taken, just the guns you and the liberals don't think we should have, got it, the 1st time.

 

How about we regulate alcohol and all vehicles to? They kill tenfold more.

 

 

 

"The constitution was made a long time ago and the world has changed a lot since then. We have to amend to fit our times."

 

The fundamental mentality of the liberal, the constitution is old and therefore really doesn't apply, it can be trampled for an agenda's sake, got it.....

 

 

eta liberal vocabulary clarification, "regulate"...translation...ban..

Edited May 11, 2009 by buzzsawBeaver

[bluefieldRocks 14]

Sorry guys, I havent really read any post in this thread (sorry). But I would like to ask a question or two:

 

My question is, why should we be able to have sub-machine guns in our house? I mean i'm going to use call of duty 4: Modern Warefare for example. In that game, I like to use the p90 and the ak47 and the mp5. Now, this may sound stupid, but this game is pretty realisitic in the way in which they shoot, the the amount of rounds that are used. Now the p90 shoots ammo insanley fast. I understand people like to take their guns out and have fun with them. I don't care about that, i've did that before. My question is why do you really need those kind of wepons? Say your house gets robbed, they steal your ak47 and a few days later they find where 5 or 6 people were shot and killed on a street corner with an Ak47, turns out it is yours. What will happen now? My point is, most people have guns for protection and hunting. You DO NOT take a fully auto machine gun into the woods. You take 30.6's and pistols and stuff like that. Why is their a need for sub machine guns in peoples houses?

 

Not trying to stir up anything or cause problems. I'm just looking for an honest answer

[Guest BEAVERTAIL]

I think the answer is in my first post on page 2. I suggest you read it.