ClumsyMonkey.net

In a few days (I believe monday), the ban imposed on automatic weapons 10 years ago will expire. When Bush was elected, he promised to renew this ban. Unfortunately, he lied (Gasp!). Many police officials and politicians predict crime will dramatically increase when gang members and criminals and legally able to get their hands on Uzis. I think that the government really dropped the ball on this one. I am against the right to bear arms, but I can see reasons why people are for it. I see no reason for a civilian to have an automatic weapon.

Discuss

There's lots of room in Canada if anyone feels like moving a little further north. I know it's cold, but snowflakes hurt much less than automatic gunfire.

I think the US will have a comeback sooner or later

Axtech wrote:There's lots of room in Canada if anyone feels like moving a little further north. I know it's cold, but snowflakes hurt much less than automatic gunfire.

Who needs to carry an automatic weapon around? That's like giving citizens military weapons. What are the police gonna carry, bazookas, rocket launchers and drive tanks around just to protect themselves?

is anyone for Automatic Weapons? Other then Venom of course.

Rusty wrote:Who needs to carry an automatic weapon around? That's like giving citizens military weapons.

Correction: That is giving citizens military weapons. The right to bear them, anyways.

I may be wrong but isnt there civilian models of military weapons?

Yes, but assult weapons were banned in 94 by Clinton. Unfortunately, the ban is ending now, and Bush & Co. have decided to not even vote on whether or not to renew the ban.

it's official Bush truly is evil, my brain can't even understand his thinking it's so backwards from mine.

Well, they seem to think that they won't get enough votes to ban it.

So it's not just Bush, it's the whole damned government.

yeah... this makes absolutely NO sense.

Well I'm sure letting civilians have the right to bear automatic weapons, will greatly decrease the crime rate, and of course no acts of "terrorism" will be commited in America now.

K. Now i think being allowed to own guns for "protection" is bullshit. Ak-47 puts me off <b>going</b> to America at all. :\

Sine wrote:K. Now i think being allowed to own guns for "protection" is bullshit. Ak-47 puts me off <b>going</b> to America at all. :\

Exactly. I don't even want to go near the American border if people are going to be able to have Ak-47s thats bullshit. They should have learned their lesson after Columbine. That was a tradegy. You get the same situation except now you have military grade weapons involved, it's just a massacre, like shooting fish in a barrel. In my opinion no civilian should be allowed to own a gun.

Then you'd have frigging Charlton Heston after you saying it's his constitutional right.

When, in fact, that was a right given with the intention of allowing citizens to own muskets to defend themselves during invasions/national conflict.

I fucking Hate Charlton Heston. He had a gun rally in Columbine a week after the shootings. What a belligerent asshole.

Charlton Heston is a flaming maniac!!!!!!!! He's gun crazy, if someone flipped out and massacred members of his precious gun club I bet he wouldn't like guns so much anymore. But it was only students who were killed by the far too simple accessibility to guns. That asshole. "From my cold dead hands." One day someone is gonna flip out and do just that.

As the resident CM gun bearer, I guess I should put my 2 cents in. I am completely for banning assault weapons. Civilians have no need for them, and I do believe making access to them easier will increase the likelihood for violent crime. I do believe people in the States should have the right to own firearms for sport/recreation. If people were buying fully automatic weapons to go to a rifle range and blow a target all to pieces, then go home and lock them up in a secure place, then that would be great. But everyone knows that's not going to happen. Although I do raise an eyebrow to lots of gun legislation, I do realize it is a neccessity in today's society. I feel Canada's gun laws are very strict, but I think they are set up well to give those who do own for recreation/sport the ability to use guns for their intended purpose. From what I remember about Canadian firearm laws, it's even a tough process to let someone borrow a firearm. Maybe you guys can shed some insight on how well it works in your opinions. I understand your distaste for guns Sinead, and I understand your opinion on the subject as we have discussed before. So no, no AK-47's for the people's. Just not a neccessary firearm to have.