I'm not disagreeing with you (mostly); however to paraphrase Bob Dylan, "The Times They Are A-Changin'' and not necessarily for the better.Keith B wrote:I'll say it's so. I believe I should have the right to own a fully equipped and armed M1 Abrams tank if I want it. Now, I don't have an issue having a background check done, but if I want an F-16 with full armament, and if I have a clean background and no (recorded) history of mental illness (and about $25 million spare change lying around) I should be able to get one.Oldgringo wrote:Surely to goodness, you're not stating that citizens should have bazookas, rocket launchers, howitzers, machine guns, flame throwers and other military style weapons? Say it ain't so.Soccerdad1995 wrote:rm9792 wrote:Wow. You have no idea what the 2nd amendment is about do you? The NFA act is a massive violation of the intent of the 2nd if you read the words of the framers when they discuss it.Oldgringo wrote:I wondered what a bump stock is and how it works so:
After watching this, I don't see myself needing or wanting one. If this video is real, these things should fall under the same restrictions as do full automatics, IMO.
{snip}
Those who say they are "staunch supporters" of the 2nd Amendment, and then say that military style weapons should not be owned by citizens have zero understanding of the reason for the 2nd Amendment in the first place.
{snip}
Although not born in Texas, I do know the what, when and where of "The Come and Take it Flag".
