A Firearms Refresher Course
#11
01-02-2013, 10:54 AM
A tank(or a mig-29) is a piece of equipment. The means to arm them are illegal. A bazooka is legal,the explosive shell is not. A stinger is legal,the warhead is not.(along with the acquisition computer)
Holding the correct license you could possess the explosive for any of them. Use of the explosive in the wrong way is illegal. No license is needed for black powder,pack it in a pipe and it's illegal. 
Like firearms? Buy as many as you want/can afford. Buy as many as you can P2P or any other non-tracked sale.
Don't like firearms? Don't buy them. Don't like the people that have them? Don't associate with them.
__________________
Remember... friends are few and far between. TRUCKIN' AIN'T FOR WUSSES!!! "I am willing to admit that I was wrong." The Rev.
#13
01-02-2013, 07:32 PM
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Somewhere between Rochester NY and Gaults' Gulch
Posts: 2,698
Well the other guys beat me to it as far as the bazooka/Mig goes. But a few years ago there was a military vehicle show here and there it was A TANK! It was a small wheeled one (WWII?) the point is YES you can own a tank but I'd bet anything I have that the main gun was de-milled! That means it was destroyed to a point that it could not perform it's intended function. Kinda like my meager collection of field artillary shells
 BTW Hobo, I don't understand your "objection" Ford brought up something to discuss that really wasn't relavent and you followed his lead. I didn't mean to insult anyone. MR FORD said "I do find it odd that people believe certain guns/all guns should be outlawed yet it's perfectly legal to own a tank and NOBODY is attempting to outlaw that. " I really don't remember hearing to much about tanks being used in crimes, but if you do a search you might find where in 198? a guy stole a M109 Howitzer at Ft Sill OK. and ran over an MPs car and tried to blow up a bank vault. But then again he STOLE IT!
#14
01-02-2013, 10:24 PM
Point was that you can't control those who avoid the laws. More registration/bans won't stop those people. But those that have a need for government to control all aspects of their life believe that nobody else can do without it. And if doesn't effect what they do/want/need then they're all for it.
#15
01-03-2013, 04:43 AM
Point was that you can't control those who avoid the laws. More registration/bans won't stop those people. But those that have a need for government to control all aspects of their life believe that nobody else can do without it. And if doesn't effect what they do/want/need then they're all for it.
#16
01-03-2013, 04:46 AM
#17
01-03-2013, 05:10 AM
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Somewhere between Rochester NY and Gaults' Gulch
Posts: 2,698
HUH??You want a hug from me???
Last edited by repete; 01-03-2013 at 05:57 AM.
#19
01-03-2013, 07:21 AM
Best argument I've heard so far for a BAN on ammunition (instead of guns.) Thanks, Chris.
Ammo doesn't know the difference between a sport rifle or AW. And if you want to the propellant can be made from"legal"sources. Best argument I've heard so far for background checks and "transfer" laws. Thanks, Chris. No problem with background checks. How would you do that with private sales?(great way to run a criminal check on someone without cause) Or maybe all private sales have to go through a licensed dealer? Might as well do that with all types of private sales. Great boon for the economy,put a tax on it. Tell it to the children of Sandy Hook, Chris. Tell it to their parents. The thought that you can eliminate any chance of something like that is pretty naive. Maybe we should ban all cleaning products,most households have the chemicals to make a low rate explosive. How about gasoline? That and one very common compound will make a very large fast burn. Just because it hasn't been done yet,doesn't mean it won't. Ban every gun. LEO's also. They have illegal shootings so that means they can't be trusted with firearms. Look at England,very few special licensed police there to carry firearms. Ban all the firearms and then no one needs to have armed gaurds. Including the president or any other member of government. All any of it is,is a feel good law. Someone that wants to kill a lot of people will find a easy way to do it. And they won't be the least concerned whether it is legal or not.
#20
01-03-2013, 08:56 AM
Yeah... sniff... I'm feeling weak, scared, unprotected and vulnerable to the advancing brownshirts of the Obama regime. You know... kinda like a "gun nut!"
|
