The weapon of choice for the British army at that time was the Brown Bess single shot smooth bore musket . Times change and you still have to go through paperwork and federal channels to obtain the Class III license required for a BAR.
Printable View
The weapon of choice for the British army at that time was the Brown Bess single shot smooth bore musket . Times change and you still have to go through paperwork and federal channels to obtain the Class III license required for a BAR.
Where exactly does it say that ????Quote:
Originally Posted by pixelfixed
Here it is, just in case you are not sure what it says
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.
Yep not seeing the Musket or the BAR in there :shrug:
BTW in case you are confused about what it means, those 9 people in the black robes decided in 2008 and 2010
In 2008 and 2010, the Supreme Court issued two Second Amendment decisions. In District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008), the Court ruled that the Second Amendment protects an individual's right to possess a firearm, unconnected to service in a militia and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home. In dicta, the Court listed many longstanding prohibitions and restrictions on firearms possession as being consistent with the Second Amendment. In McDonald v. Chicago, 561 U.S. 3025 (2010), the Court ruled that the Second Amendment limits state and local governments to the same extent that it limits the federal government
God don't ya just hate those facts, they just tend to get in the way of all the Anti-gun rhetoric
Edit: Honestly haven't you antis learned yet, we gun nuts know our facts and know where to find them,,, The only arguement we can't refute is the "If all the guns in the world were to suddenly disappear we would all hold hands and sing Kumbya" you guys think it could happen, we think there is a good chance things could even be worse....
I guess it comes dowm to what you believe is actually "Human Nature" myself I belive in history and so far mankind has been pretty darn bad, and seemingly getting worse...
with all due respect, are you out of your mind? The Second Amendment does not read that way, but then again, you would probably know that if you took the time to actually read them. The fact that you made such a silly statement. I can come to no other conclusion than you really have no idea what you're talking about, but blessed are the ignorant because boy, they must be a content lot, as they say ignorance is blissQuote:
Originally Posted by pixelfixed
My father landed at Juno Beach on 6/06/1944.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nightblade
If the world were suddenly disarmed of all guns.....I could be okay with swords and spears again. A bit messier and of course it would require a little more moxie to face your foe in battle...but a lot of honorary historical figures fought and died bravely with swords in their hands . oooh broadswords,katanas and longbows......yayyyyy !! I just got done watching LOTR's sorry I'm a bit jazzed up . Nasteee Orcs'es !!!:medvl: :tameshigiri:
Personally, I like and prefer guns, ammo is pretty cheap. Think about it, if we go back to swords and spears those Escher hones will probably triple in price as we'll need a keen edge to lay waste to our foes. I can barely even afford one now as it is. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Nightblade
Hmmm...do you suppose Lynn,Glen and the other honemasters would offer sharpening services ? Off topic now sorryyy ! Welcome to the Longsword Place !??
Yeah, I can just see the next generation of hone-based robber barons. I can just see those Welsh miners quaking in their boots at the thought!Quote:
Originally Posted by ReardenSteel
Sorry mods I just can't resist........We cooould start trying to come up with a working...........LIGHTSABRE HA HA !!!!! wHAT'S YOUR OPINION ON LIGHTSBRES HAHAHA ! Howdya like me now !!?? Okay c'mon guys I'm weak here we gotta stop...FOOOOOCUSSSSS ! :rofl2::jedi:
The reasons seem easy and obvious to me. "According to the University of Leiden study on violence, Australia and Britain have the highest levels of violence in the western world. The US isn't even in the top 10." IIRC, the study was commissioned by two west European governments (maybe Netherlands and Finland). Gun shootings are going to be higher in the U.S. because we are allowed to shoot someone trying to hurt us. If I lived across the pond, I'd probably wear running shoes all the time. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by straightrazorheaven
Levels of violence from all sources? It is lower in the U.S.; probably because we often tend to carry a gun. Criminals probably hate any potential victim who turns out to be armed. Why are the levels of violence higher in the U.K. and Australia? Because of the stringent gun laws. The British crook knows that his law-abiding victim is highly unlikely to have a gun; or a knife of any size and effectiveness.
The knife laws are so stringent and silly, much like their gun laws, that some U.K. forums forbid any post from even mentioning them.
Lets give England and Australia mandatory handgun carry requirements for non-objecting adults; and institute Kennesaw, GA style home ownership laws. I'd bet the high levels of illegal violence drops like a rock in the first 3 months. Especially in the big cities with the highest rates.