Explain to a non-American why it makes sense to change Congress every two years!

Lifetime term limits. No more than 20 collective years in all elected offices, regardless of level (local, state, federal)

 

That photo of him in a diaper entirely fits his personality.

 

A good .50-caliber sniper rifle tops out at about $15,000 with the budget line about $2,500. Those without felony records can get them through a licensed dealer. Semi-automatic shotguns JUST like in The Expendables are also easy to get.

The fact here is, Americans are excellent gunsmiths. We charge for good work. (*Memo to our military: BUY AMERICAN!*) We are also the world's arms exporter, last I saw. We are the best at what we do.

That said, do we really need a drum-roll Thompson except to play Al Capone at some gun range? Hell yes!

Would it have changed prior killings? Of course. Just as trebuchets changed castle-storming. Or the bow and arrow for that matter. Teflon-coated cop-killer bullets got a lot of talk a few years back. Few liberals dared fight that one. Now they just want to grab everyone's means of defense against themselves.

 

Actually, I was talking about what @Dayton3 was talking about: "small surface to air missiles like Stingers, and small anti vehicle weapons like RPGs, and LAWs (light anti tank weapons)"

What's a "drum-roll Thompson?"

What do you mean they dared to FIGHT it? As in ban them/not ban them?

 

Yeah, I agree, but are you making the point that those who passed the 2nd Amendment likely WOULD have envisioned weapons beyond the weapons of their time?

Aren't certain anti-aircraft systems "bearable?"

 

How can it not get you dead?

 

If those weapons were fired into a crowd of people, they are not going to kill significant numbers of people? Surely you can't be serious!

Well this slightly contradicts what you say above about them not killing significant numbers of people!

 

With or without weapon systems?

 

@struth says “Tank” with James Garner.

 

@struth says “Tank” with James Garner.

 

I mean, guns can cause more harm than knives can't they? So it would be odd for a state to allow guns to be carried but not knives.

 

I don't know but surmise that the tanks can have the weapons systems but not the shells.

 

If memory serves I agree.

 

Not really. The difference is in being able to do it at range, and how much effort one is willing to put into it. Also, those who use guns, usually just shoot to kill and once dead, rarely shoot up the dead bodies. THose who use knives, usually make multiple stab wounds, even after the victim dies. The end result is the same, death.

 

Okay, well then you're saying they're the same?

 

They are the same in that both are equally capable of being deadly weapons when used for such purposes against another individual. If one is stabbed right in the kidney, death is both painful and almost immediate due to the body going into shock from blood loss to vital organs.

For all of its apparent durability, the human body is quite fragile, barely more than a water balloon.

 

IIRC privately owned armored combat vehicles in the U.S. must by law have their weapons systems disabled. All of them. From the main cannon to the light machine guns.

 

Because muskat is a wine and musket is a gun.

 

That postmortem stabbing does sound very believable. Knife killings are usually frenzied. It's hard to stop once the loco-motive gets rolling.

 

The .45-calibre Thompson submachinegun had a variety of magazines, but the best-known was the Chicago gangster favorite shaped like a flat circular drum.

https://duckduckgo.com/html/?q=thompson submachine gun

From now on, do your own homework. This took me 20 seconds.

They wanted the bullets sold but couldn't be TOO public about it for fear of rightly being called cop-haters. I used it only as one example of ridiculous leftist hypocrisy over guns. Killing cops is OK (*hand sign!*) but owning one for self-protection is not...?

 

Why not? We do. All the time.
The other side of this is the inane proposition that they believed firearms technology would never improve.

"Bearable arms", under US jurisprudence, means those firearms commonly used for traditionally legal purposes.
So... no.

 

I did. "Drum-roll Thompson" returned zero matching results on Google. Did you actually expect that it would?

What bill/year was this?

 

Using Google was your first mistake. Considering they openly hate gun posts and gun company monetization, not really. Try DuckDuckGo. It's way better on many levels. And also be advised you may be filtered in your own country as well as by the local politically-overcorrect types running that sorry outfit.

 

What bill/year was this? I couldn't possibly search for anything so vague.

 

Is it written into any law?