Makes alot of sense to me, but I suppose you need a little common sense to understand it first.

.

The Armlite AR-50 canbe used as a sniper rifle, and has been done. Its best suited purpose is as a anti-material weapon. You know if ya want stop a Semi-truck, Trawler, Aircraft on ground or air, Great on outboard engines, And of coarse it will pentrate buildings as well. I could see a need for such a weapon in civilan hands. Not to mention it makes a great range gun, and I consider it a valuable collecter gun and investment. I also like the Armlite Ar-30 in 338 Luipa A fine ultra-range sniper rifle. And I agree with anybody that the 3006 is a good weapon. The 3006 will kill anything on this continent.

Originally Posted by WrongWayRC

Every crook that goes into a house knows there is a gun and person trained to use it. What a deterrent.

And I have no issue with this. Oddly here is a government enforced program that has not resulted in guns being taken away and has not taken away civil rights and has forced training on the people PRIOR to having the guns with no obvious negative effect.

But if anything like that is suggested in this country all you get is regurgitation of bumper sticker mottos.

Originally Posted by Judge

Ah, Craven is back. Now I can look forward to endless absurd remarks and personal attacks all of which result from having nothing to say beyond "liberals bad".


to Airborne-

So if I understand the argument about the Constitutional right to bear arms you feel that this obviates the need for any kind of training or proof of proficiency. So truly any moron who is not a felon or otherwise eliminated can have a gun with no requirement to know how to use it safely and you are OK with that?

But because the Constitution does not give him the right to drive a car or fly a plane or cut hair he must prove he is capable of doing so??

Wow. It is this kind of twisted up logic that loses the argument for gun ownership. I simply am amazed that so many gun owners are so fervent in their idea that the safe use of a firearm is not something that should be required to own one.

In the military did they hand you your weapon and say "there you go Son, you're a killer now"? and just let you wander off without training?? I'm betting they did not.

Please tell me how training in the safe and proper use of a firearm violates your right to keep and bear arms??

And Craven, can you do us all a favor and see if you can possibly string together more than a single thought into a post so we do not have to read 15 consecutive single sentence posts as you attempt to get your point across??

I have no problem with being required to "qualify" with any weapon I may own and want to operate. I can however buy a car and not operate it in public without a permit or tags. If I am a holder of a permit I can take it into any state. How about using that logic with firearms? If I am a legal, trained holder of a weapon, then I can carry it in any state. Sounds good to me.

Originally Posted by 50%plane

they need to repeal the full-auto ban... IMHO....

Get a drivers licence and you can drive a Ferrari... Why discriminate against gun owners,,,

There are classes of license. I do think you are correct though. If you can qualify with an Apache then you should keep one in your yard! You could service your own F-15

Originally Posted by JimC-MD

There are classes of license. I do think you are correct though. If you can qualify with an Apache then you should keep one in your yard! You could service your own F-15

I've got my own F-15...

Originally Posted by JimC-MD

If I am a legal, trained holder of a weapon, then I can carry it in any state. Sounds good to me.

I have no issue with that line of thinking.

Originally Posted by Judge

And I have no issue with this. Oddly here is a government enforced program that has not resulted in guns being taken away and has not taken away civil rights and has forced training on the people PRIOR to having the guns with no obvious negative effect.

But if anything like that is suggested in this country all you get is regurgitation of bumper sticker mottos.

Maybe it's the part where they are forced into it that brings out the bumper sticker mottos that cause your panties to chafe?

Maybe you have forgotten that this country was founded on principles that have, as a common denominator, freedom?

Or maybe you really, truly are a bleeding heart liberal like Craven says, and no amount of logical thought will dissuade you from your socialist lovefest with CHANGE!!!!

Run away, Judge! Run away from the left coast, come breathe the good clean midwestern air and purge the liberal taint from your system while you still have a chance to enjoy life as a real American and not one of the liberal slaves to change. Come shoot guns just for the sake of wasting ammo, blow **** up just for the sake of the big BOOM!!

Trying to license firearm users and owners will only make criminals out of otherwise good people. There is a reason why it is the second amendment- because freedom to speak about this is just a little more important.

In Massachusetts you cant get a firearm license unless you take a safety class. and that only lets you get a rifle that holds less than ten rounds. 22's are exempt. you then have to take a pistol safety course to own a large capacity gun or pistol(over 10 rounds) and you have to pass the course test at the end.. sorry to say it guys but I think this is the way things are going in this country. There are other states that have adopted this idea. Really I think it is about creating more revenue for the state than safety. My state says owning a gun is a priveledge not a right. I wish someone could sue them over this.
This is what worries me because once there are laws in place there will only be more and more in the future. They got their foot in the door and now there is no way to get them out. Unfortunately Govt. cant just make a simple law and leave it alone they will slowly keep making more and more laws eventually you wont be able to own a bb gun. Damn democrats.

Well I tell you that if some state makes me register my guns and tell me how to use my guns (that I have in two wars) they can come get me. I promise you it will be one hell of a showdown. For the record its not the guns you have to worry about. There will be plenty of other pissed off veterans that have all the good training on how to make things go boom that you have to worry about.

The British Army really did its share in training about IED's and typical ambush techniques of the IRA. It only figures that the current theater of operations has the US and coalition forces facing against some insurgency / guerrilla tactics not far removed from how we fought the British.

Its not to hard to concieve that without firearms its very easy to create more damage. Many of us have served our country well and been lawful citizens. There comes a point, however, when enough is enough.

Seems ironic that the passed couple times I spent in war we allowed them to keep at least one fire arm per man. So am I to understand that the Iraqi's and Afghans should have more of a precedence to own firearms then I?

For the record my first job in the Army and the one I was most trained in was the Infantry. Fairly basic job; find the people wearing different uniforms from you and kill them. Did my job and did not mind it. When we lost a few of our own the first week in Iraq we defended ourselves and after taking up the aggression level we did not loose another person. You might say I am very passionate about my basic rights; the men I served with along with myself did our share of doing a dirty job most could not.

The amount of rounds I fired in training (both day and night) probably is more than the average person will ever shoot. The amount rounds slung both ways in the sandbox were a lot.

A lot of these gun rules remind me of the time I was training with the British Paratroopers. At the grenade range they tried to tell me how to throw a grenade. Same exact grenade we use. When it was my turn I took the grenade, did as I was trained, and target destroyed. The trainer then said yeah you could do it like that also.

let me start by saying Thank You for all your military service. I believe that if the govt were to take all the guns away there would be more people being run over. I know I hate my statesview on guns but it unfortunately is a democratic state. I think the dems should stick to what they do best. sex scandals.

Well Kennedy had some class when it comes to that! Clinton must have been partaking of the best sticky for Monica.

Atleast Clinton didnt drive Monica into the water and run. kennedy is one who says he is for guns but votes them down when he gets a chance.

You know no one has mentioned their at times 40lbs plus guided projectiles in this thread! Just think if big bro throws down some serious limitations on that!