Originally Posted by cutthemdown
The law drawn so far away from those weapons already bringing them up is so foolish and not even close to a real argument.
Hey i would like to buy a semi auto rifle that shoots a .223 bullet......but could you make it look cool with a collapsable stock and a pistol grip? ARRRRRRRRRG WHAT DO YOU WANT A ****ING TANK OR A NUCLEAR BOMB!
how can you not see that doesn't match up inferno?
You're missing the point. I assume most people are sane and don't want a nuclear weapon. The problem is, if you agree that there are "arms" that a citizen should not possess, then you are implicitly agreeing that there is a debate to be had about where to draw the line. But the NRA gun nuts only want to complain about attempts at gun control...they will by and large side-step the issue of where to draw that line. What should the applied standard be when determining whether or not a citizen should be able to possess a particular weapon? Ant was blistering houghtam for his suggestions, but I'm curious to know where he would personally draw the line, and on what basis.