The right to buy, own, and legitimately use a gun is one thing. The right to buy an automatic assault rifle is another thing entirely. Gun rights shouldn't extend to weapons with the sole purpose of causing as much harm as possible, amirite?

+187 The right to buy, own, and legitimately use a gun is one thing. The right to buy an automatic assault rifle is another thing entirely. Gun rights shouldn't extend to weapons with the sole purpose of causing as much harm as possible, amirite?

by Anonymous 11 years ago

Not sure how it is in other countries, but you cannot legally buy an automatic assault rifle in the United States.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

in most states you can, but most of the mare prohibitively expensive. full automatic weapons usually cost tens of thousands and up in the U.S., so most people can't afford them. but in order to buy them you need a class 3 license and you have to pay for a tax stamp so the government knows you have it. otherwise it's a major felony.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

Well, yes. But the common man cannot buy one. You have to go through extensive measures to get one and more than likely there are lots of background checks involved.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

You can't have a crime mark on your permanent record to get class 2. which is for suppressors right?

by Anonymous 11 years ago

unfortunately I don't really know anything about obtaining a suppressor, but I don't believe your required to go through any extra steps in most states. I live in California so here they are completely illegal so I haven't looked into them as I would not be able to obtain one legally. but I can tell you that if you have ever been charged with a felony federal law prohibits you from legally possessing any firearms period.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

in the U.S. the purpose of the second amendment is so that the people have a way of defending themselves from a tyrannical government. in order for this reason to be applicable we must be able to possess the same weapons as our government. you can't fight a tyrannical government if the have tanks, drones, and fully automatic firearms if you do not posses weapons of similar capability. we can't take on the government with bolt action rifles and single action revolvers (at least not as effectively). because of this the people must be able to own weapons of the latest technology.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

I was wondering how people could justify voting "no," because I don't think about the government turning tyrannical. Thank you for such a good explanation.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

i wanted a tank for my first car :(

by Anonymous 11 years ago

your welcome, most people don't realize they the purpose of the second is for protection from government. this was needed to be put in because our country was founded after we rebelled against a tyrannical government, and without firearms we would not have been able to do so. well if you actually have the money to afford one you can get one in most states, it is extremely difficult though. but with enough time and money you can get one.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

I always thought the 2nd was for self defense. If the government turned tyrannical, it would most probably flout the Constitution anyway...

by Anonymous 11 years ago

self defense from government maybe, but not from individual criminals. and when the government does try and bring down the constitution the American people are supposed to fight back, as they should already be doing. the government is already doing there best to slowly strip down your constitutional rights with there ongoing attacks on the 1st, 2nd, 4th, and 5th, amendments of the bill of rights. Americans of the current generation though are just sheep though, too stupid to realize they they are not really free.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

I honestly have no or very little idea what's going on in America, but if you just had pistols for self defense against criminals, you could then raid a gun shop or something. If the government is tyrannical, you won't care what the laws are.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

if all we had were handguns for self defense we could not raid a gun shop during a time when we need more weapons because all that gun shop would carry would be handguns because other firearms would not be legally obtainable. you need the tools beforehand in order to use them when you need them. those who are not prepared already may not have the chance to obtain what they need when they need it.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

I think by the time people realized they had to fight back/form a rebellion, there would be laws in place to make it almost impossible for the common man to get a gun. I mean, that's the first thing I'd do if I ran the government and decided to go tyrannical wary

by Anonymous 11 years ago

Of course, that is what governments have done throughout history. Before the Nazis began the holocaust they made it illegal for Jews to possess firearms. Before a government goes full on tyrannical they will do their best to assure that their power cannot be threatened.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

almost none of those massacres are even committed with your "assault weapons". and your wrong about that. the American Revolution, the patriots used the "Assault Weapons" of their time to overthrow the British. you see many of the weapons used by the patriots in the American revolution were the pinnacle of weapons technology and the same technology available to the British government. with the advancement in technology the small arms we posses should be of the same technology available to the government. advancement of technology does nothing to make the concept of the 2nd amendment obsolete, if anything it just provides further justification. it seems pretty stupid to think we will never have to deal with a tyrannical government. to pretend that this is America so it will never happen here. in some ways we are already seeing the beginning of such a government. tell you what, if we do ever have to deal with a tyrannical government you can go on and live as a slave if you choose, but don't try and force me into slavery as well. I will keep my weapons of current technology, and I will use them to defend myself, my family, my property, and my country.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

So the fact that the country was formed in response to a tyrannical leader doesn't count as an instance of tyranny in the country's history?

by Anonymous 11 years ago

no, it isn't. it doesn't justify preventing the millions of people in this country from protecting themselves from both crime and government. I bet you don't even know the difference between what the government recognizes as an "Assault Weapon" and a normal firearm. just a hint, nearly all of them are purely cosmetic. Oh really, you should tell that to the Branch Dividians. the federal government laid siege to the Branch Dividian compound in Waco, Texas. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3H8Zc5jN72s

by Anonymous 11 years ago

the only example is from the 1700s? I just gave you another example and I got more if you want to hear them. the massacres are not a result of loose gun laws, you should stop blaming objects for the actions of people. crazy people will murder people regardless of the tools available. just say the word and I will give you more examples of tyranny in the U.S., here is one for you. during world war 2 the federal government put thousands of innocent American citizens of Japanese decent in concentration camps. many people died in these camps. is that tyrannical enough for you? The Osaka School Massacre http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osaka_school_massacre At 10:15 that morning, 37-year-old former janitor Mamoru Takuma entered the school armed with a kitchen knife and began stabbing numerous school children and teachers. He killed eight children, mostly between the ages of seven and eight, and seriously wounded thirteen other children and two teachers. Akihabara Massacre http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Akihabara_massacre man hits a crowd of people with a truck, then stabs 12 more. if you think that gun control laws will stop massacres then you are severely misguided.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

Or maybe the government never became tyrannical because the people had assault weapons...

by Anonymous 11 years ago

that is how it should be, the government should fear and obey the people not the other way around. our government is not a tyrannical government but they have committed acts of tyranny in the past and will do so in the future.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

For most people I agree...which is what is in place now. But if you're qualified and licensed to use one (such as a military official) and have the proper screening done its fine.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

Just because we don't have assault weapons doesn't mean we still can't kill uyou. You might as well take away my shotgun and pistol too. Jeez, get over the fact that there are lunatics out there. Most of us know how to properly use a weapon with the potential to kill. Besides, making them illegal won't do anything. If a criminal's that desperate to kill somebody, he'll just get the gun illegally too, I'm willing to bet. Like I said, GET OVER IT!!!! I won't willingly give up my rifle, shotgun,, or any weapon I own because our government can't educate society on proper gun handling and how to spot the tell-tale signs of somebody plotting to massacre innocent people. Don't sell guns to the lunatics. It's that simple.

by Anonymous 11 years ago