7 ms·
Assault Rifles seem to be ok for the US government to place into the hands of US civilians.
by firecall 4y ago
Assault Rifles seem to be ok for the US government to place into the hands of US civilians.
- JKCalhoun 4y agoAgree. But I think the idea of flying a bomb into someone's car (the first thing that came to mind when I thought about it for a few seconds) is, to the powerful, a whole 'nother level of terror. Not to be so cynical/dark, but I'm surprised to have not yet heard of a targeted assassination done by an amateur with an off-the-shelf drone. I have to admit the idea is frightening.
- andrei_says_ 4y agoRemember the D.C. Sniper attacks? Not sure if grenades are as available to the public as bullets and if I remember correctly bombs are illegal to make.
- sixstringtheory 4y ago> bombs are illegal to make Tell that to Ted Kaczynski, Timothy McVeigh, the Tsarnaev brothers and that guy that brought pipe bombs to the January 6th insurrection.
- maxwell 4y agoYou have it backwards: the U.S. government is explicitly prohibited constitutionally from infringing the human right to bear arms.
- autoexec 4y agoThat's why everyone can buy sell and own nukes!
- maxwell 4y agoSeems tactical nukes that can be fired by a single individual may constitutionally be held. Firing them appears extremely illegal, owning them is likely subject to physical monitoring, and motorized missile launchers and such are regulated by state regulations under the Tenth. cf. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31862258#31869185 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31862258#31869185
- collegeburner 4y ago^^^ this comment was posted by someone who does not know what an assault rifle is. it is very difficult and expensive to get ahold of a assault rifle these days and has been for almost 40 years. though yeah i think we should repeal that law, there is nothing wrong with civilians owning assault rifles. the federal government is literally not allowed to pass or enforce laws against this because it clearly infringes the individual right to keep and bear arms. we can only hope some time in the next few years the NFA, GCA and FOPA are struck down, along with all the asinine regulation that has forced so many small gun manufacturers out of business, increased gun prices for American consumers and retarded innovation in civilian small arms.
- ethanbond 4y agoYes same for tactical nukes
- theodric 4y agoLegalize recreational nukes
- collegeburner 4y agolegalize nuclear bombs... bees make honey
- karambyt 4y agoI hate this argument because it's fucking stupid. I think we can draw a clear and logical line between "gun" and "doomsday device".
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- ethanbond 4y agoYeah, there’s a line somewhere obviously, but it’s also not defined by “is it an arm? Okay then you have a right to bear it!” As technology advances, either we have to be comfortable with more and more destructive devices being in the hands of everyday people, or we have to be comfortable with restricting access to more and more devices that qualify as “arms.”
- AdrianB1 4y agoPlease let me know how to buy one, they are forbidden since 1936 with very few exceptions and astronomic prices.