obama: what a joke

[AandF6969]

what exactly do you want an example of? Do you wish for me to list examples of racism I've experienced?

Off topic, but I hope you became more educated about "assault weapons" when the truth was brought to light. Amazing what the media will have you believe.

[BgMc31]

Off topic, but I hope you became more educated about "assault weapons" when the truth was brought to light. Amazing what the media will have you believe.

As an avid hunter and former member of law enforcement, I was already cognitive of the similarities between hunting r***es and assault r***es. But I am also aware of the differences (ie. larger magazine capacities, generally higher rates of fire, shorter range). But those are really just semantics. I know of no one who hunts with an AK47 or AR15, even though they can be used for hunting that is not their intended use.

Here's a question then, if its ok to on an assault r***e because its similar to a r***e is it safe to assume that I can own a tank, fighter plane, etc. Does the 2nd amendment protect my rights to own those things? It may seem like an absurd question, but where is the line drawn? And since, according to you all, the constitution isn't open to interpretation there is no line correct?

[AandF6969]

As an avid hunter and former member of law enforcement, I was already cognitive of the similarities between hunting r***es and assault r***es. But I am also aware of the differences (ie. larger magazine capacities, generally higher rates of fire, shorter range). But those are really just semantics. I know of no one who hunts with an AK47 or AR15, even though they can be used for hunting that is not their intended use.

Here's a question then, if its ok to on an assault r***e because its similar to a r***e is it safe to assume that I can own a tank, fighter plane, etc. Does the 2nd amendment protect my rights to own those things? It may seem like an absurd question, but where is the line drawn? And since, according to you all, the constitution isn't open to interpretation there is no line correct?

Oh I fully agree that fighter planes, tanks, fully automatics, etc. are absurd for the public to own, no matter how good your record is. But, the media campaign about semiautomatic AK47s and AR15s being "just like military weapons" is absolutely retarded... They're not. They're like a semiautomatic hunting r***e, but they look so scary! And they're used in like 1% of crimes, there aren't shootouts in the streets with these things. During the "assault weapon ban" of 1994 the barrel shroud and collapsible stock on an AR15 could make it illegal, and if it didn't have those two things it was totally legal.... what? Since a collapsible stock and heat shield make it so much more deadly...

The reason the phrase "assault weapon" even exists is because stupid-ass soccer moms who have seen AR15s and AK47s in games and movies and piss themselves every time they see them, think that people can just go out and buy a fully automatic one. Of course they're going to vote for an assault weapon ban, they don't know what a fukking assault weapon is... but if you told them you were going to take her dad's hunting r***e, it'd be a bit different.

[SMCengineer]

Here's a question then, if its ok to on an assault r***e because its similar to a r***e is it safe to assume that I can own a tank, fighter plane, etc. Does the 2nd amendment protect my rights to own those things? It may seem like an absurd question, but where is the line drawn? And since, according to you all, the constitution isn't open to interpretation there is no line correct?

It's not open to interpretation.

The second amendment:
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

Bear Arms being the operative word.

The definition of bear Arms:
a. to carry weapons.
b. to serve as a member of the military or of contending forces: His religious convictions kept him from bearing arms, but he served as an ambulance driver with the Red Cross.

Can you carry a tank? How about a fighter jet? That's your answer.

[Act of God]

Can you carry a tank? How about a fighter jet? That's your answer.

Depends, am I on or off cycle?

[BgMc31]

It's not open to interpretation.

The second amendment:
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

Bear Arms being the operative word.

The definition of bear Arms:
a. to carry weapons.
b. to serve as a member of the military or of contending forces: His religious convictions kept him from bearing arms, but he served as an ambulance driver with the Red Cross.

Can you carry a tank? How about a fighter jet? That's your answer.

But can I not carry a rocket launcher, anti-tank weapon, any series of shoulder fired missile system, etc.? These do border on the absurd but again where is the line drawn?

Oh, in regards to your original question, I wasn't being sarcastic, I will PM you my own experiences later this evening. That's real talk!