timschochet
Footballguy
Legal fireworks? Wow. I’ve never seen anything like that. But if it’s true it ought to be illegal. What’s your point?
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
Should we legalize Full-Auto Rifles, Bazookas and Grenades? (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter BigSteelThrill
- Start date
KCitons
Footballguy
My point is we don't really regulate things unless a group deems them scary.
Some fireworks are actually called mortars? Perfectly fine if you shoot them vertically, you get oohs and aaahs. Shoot them horizontally and you have something more sinister.
timschochet
Footballguy
Ditkaless Wonders
Footballguy
The Commish
Footballguy
Stealthycat
Footballguy
you mean walk into Bass Pro, buy a bazooka or surface to air missile or small nuclear warhead and go home and play with it ?
I don't think anyone would call that common sense, do you ?
toshiba
Footballguy
KCitons
Footballguy
Mortars are already legal during fireworks season in some states and year round in others. They just aren't as effective as military grade mortars. (similar to machine guns vs assault weapons)
I just question the way we apply laws to some things, but not others.
Stealthycat
Footballguy
I don't think you understand the might of the US military.
If you want to argue for equalization of private citizen's might and the Fed Govt's military might go for it. I doubt you'll find many who agree it should be equal.
Gustavo Fring
Footballguy
Let's be honest, owning a bazooka would be the t!ts. Imagine all the fun you could have with that thing.
E Street Brat
Footballguy
You should have the seen the Bazookas my old gf had. They put my heat seeking missile on full alert every time.
Politician Spock
Footballguy
It's okay. They're not needed.
State militias could fight the federal government with fireworks apparently.
Sheriff Bart
Footballguy
Ditkaless Wonders
Footballguy
Varmint hunting would move to a whole new level. Neighborhood spats could be settled in seconds instead of years. Can't find a parking space, oh yes you can!
Sheriff Bart
Footballguy
From the moment I got my driver's license I fantasized about having a rocket launcher on my car to incinerate those in my way.
Let’s do this.
msommer
Footballguy
If you blast someone in a car with your rocket launcher I'm sure some would call it a car related death, and certainly nothing to do with the 2nd amendment
Ditkaless Wonders
Footballguy
I'm not sure I want to go there. I could only afford Hyundai munitions and armament while others out on the roadway could afford Mercedes level stuff.
msommer
Footballguy
Politician Spock
Footballguy
In all seriousness... bottle rockets would send a better message than a horn honk in certain situations.
Last edited by a moderator:
Sheriff Bart
Footballguy
Quit shackliing me.
It's not my fault you either don't work hard and/or don't spend your money wisely. Personally I'm going to be letting all kinds of munitions off the chain.
jomar
Footballguy
it's my right to bear arms. if I choose an air missile to do that, why should the government be able to tell me I can't?
liberals like you want to infringe upon my rights and then you think its common sense?
Ditkaless Wonders
Footballguy
"And", not "and/or", but thanks for leaving open that possibility.
Also, be forewarned everybody. If we ever have another deadly animals draft I am taking Sheriff Bart with my first pick. His devil-may-care attitude about highway carnage is just the sort of thing I will be looking for.
The Commish
Footballguy
Wait....I can use fireworks to hunt varmints? If true, isn't this MISSION ACCOMPLISHED? Did we do it???? 
McJose
Footballguy
parrot
Footballguy
Sheriff Bart
Footballguy
Are you kidding me? You probably have better odds of hitting the Powerball than a B-2 with a shoulder launched air missile. No, to fully protect against a tyrannical government I'm going to need multiple mobile SAM's.
Stealthycat
Footballguy
argue that personal nuclear weapons is arms if you want - I'm not going to and no rationale person would
extreme examples is what anti-gun people resort to when all else fails
Stealthycat
Footballguy
what is an AR15 ? specifically what is it ?
a low caliber, semi-auto rifle
no different than a 22-250 or a .223 or a .243 hunting rifle ..... right ? you want to ban those too ?
Stealthycat
Footballguy
semi-auto rifles are legal, as they should be
they are great hunting rifles, shooting rifles and self defense
is your M-16 and M-4 legal semi-auto rifles under the common sense laws we have? if so ... go to a store, show your ID, get your background check, buy some ammo and go have fun shooting or hunting or put in the corner of your bedroom or in a safe or whatever you want to do with it. Sure, I have no problems with that. why would I ?
The Commish
Footballguy
It's not an extreme example....it's an example of your very position on guns when it's taken to completion and applied to all weapons. Don't even have to bring up cars or golf clubs or anything. According to you, laws only hurt law abiding citizens and they don't stop people from acting, so you should have no problem with this position if you really ARE about applying laws equally in all cases.
Politician Spock
Footballguy
Stealthycat
Footballguy
if you don't think bazookas and grenades and surface to air missiles and personal nukes are extreme ... then you just want to argue
nobody has ever talked about removing all the common sense laws we have right now on guns - or on automobiles or on knives etc
this thread is a dramatization of extreme examples for weak minded people to shake their heads "yes yes, see, we don't need guns !! " its quite silly to be honest
now, if it were an honest discussion on whether fully auto rifles should be less restricted? talking about those? maybe that'd be a good discussion ... but bazookas and nukes and land mines or whatever ? just silly and you know it, and I know it
Stealthycat
Footballguy
if you think so then I encourage you to take it up with your elected officials and the associations that support that view ... I mean if its a "good" argument you should have no problem finding like minded to agree with you
Politician Spock
Footballguy
I'll need your help though. Given how well [cough] you've argued that cars can be used as weapons, I need you to make that argument to government first, then I can explain that the best weapons to defend myself from someone using one of the 250,000,000 cars in this country as a weapon against me are bazookas and grenades.
I mean really, when someone is driving through a park trying to run down people, the more people armed with bazookas, the quicker that #### gets stopped! AMIRIGHT?!?
Sheriff Bart
Footballguy
The Commish
Footballguy
No....I am applying YOUR logically equally to a gun or a bazooka. Is that a bad thing? If so, why?
The problem you are running into in this thread is your very own logic. It's the same logic just applied to other objects. Would you not feel comfortable with a law abiding citizen walking around with a bazooka? If not, why not?
What about an RPG? Why is that different? If you have sound logic, it should be easy to apply to any situation, not just the ones you see fit.
ETA: This thread appears to be an example of your own logic failing you when applied to other weapons, but that can't be the case, because you have told us a MILLION times, it's not about the weapons, it's about the people so........
Last edited by a moderator:
Here is the uncomfortable truth for the 2nd Amendmenters - we decided long ago that the right to bear arms is not absolute. Once we decided that laws could constitutionally limit the right to bear arms - we are just left to argue about where that line should be drawn - and that will vary by generations and circumstances.
The Commish
Footballguy
Of course you won't engage ANY of the above in any sort of meaningful way and that's not my intention. If only you pause for a second, it's worth it. If you realize for a split second that your logic ONLY applies to things you think it should apply to, then maybe there's something you're missing and your position COULD BE more holistic.
The Commish
Footballguy
Bingo...point made a million times before and ignored a million times before. My line is just as arbitrary as anyone else's
Last edited by a moderator:
Politician Spock
Footballguy
This is also why the 2nd is now about self defense, and no longer about militias, because if any line is drawn (any line at all), then the people can't be armed as well as the fed, which makes the amendment pointless. So it has to be about self defense now to have any modern relevance at all.
KCitons
Footballguy
And this is why the discussion about something like a nuclear missile is pointless. We really on our government/military to protect us in the event of a nuclear attack from another country. But, when it comes to protecting everyone all the time from threats of violence, the government can't be in all places at all times. It is therefor up to the individual to protect themselves. I suspect the same applies to bazookas and grenades. Is it something that a person needs to protect themselves? No. Is an assault rifle? Perhaps. This is where the argument stands.
Politician Spock
Footballguy
The line not only determines what you can have to protect yourself, but also what you are protecting your self from.KCitons said:
KCitons
Footballguy
I would agree with this 15 years ago, but things have changed. There are too many unregistered and homemade ghost guns in circulation now to make sure things are even ever again. I've always said I would give up all of my guns if we could be sure that criminals have given up their guns as well. This will never come close to being accomplished.
Stealthycat
Footballguy
what logic ?The Commish said:
I don't think everyone should have tanks but I'm ok with people having automobiles
I don't think people should have bazookas but I'm ok with people having semi-auto rifles to hunt/shoot with/self defense
you mean that logic ?
I don't think people should be able to own nuclear weapons - you do I suppose and that's ok. Petition your elected officials and make a go of it. See what happens
Stealthycat
Footballguy
so its NOT just AR15's you want to ban
I didn't think so
so what is REALLY what you want to ban ?its ok just to own it and admit it
Stealthycat
Footballguy
and we've done that - we don't need to define it any moreSinn Fein said:
we need to get rid of violence
McJose
Footballguy
Similar threads
