Are "gun-rights" advocates who say they "need" combat-style weaponry to "protect the nation from dictatorship" dangerous anarchists who are endangering the REAL Second-Amendment rights of law-abiding Americans with their paranoid, anti-government rants?

And tiredbrain you take this way to seriously ! Its not about YOU !!!

And YES, the feds do have the authority to decide what you need or want ! Like I said they don't allow you to have grenades or mines ,etc,etc and we don't hear you whining about that ! They are the finale arbiter on weapons ! What about that don't you understand ! They oversee the safety of the public and if they decide that restricting assault weapons that will be the finale answer ! These weapons will become just like grenades or mines !

Look no further than the title this thread and the question posed. Paranoid, anti govt dangerous anarchists. Fred is demonizing gun rights advocates just as he learned from his MSNBS. this is the way of politics today, demonize you opponent, marginalize them as whacko.

You don't trust me to have an AR 15, yet you trust a govt made up of men that only seek power. You arguments my be well intentioned but are full of flaws. I have never demonstrated violent or illegal tendency, can you say the same of your Govt?

Background checks sound great, and mental health checks sound reasonable however.....who makes the decision if a person is compitant? What if having a strong political opinion that was out of step with those in office was deemed radical?. You don't think it can happen? As a Japanese American who was around in WW2.

Munster where in the constitution do you find that right??

It does not matter if you feel there is a reason or not dum dum. There is no authority to deny the ownership by the Federal govt .

And YES, the feds do have the authority to decide what you need or want ! Like I said they don't allow you to have grenades or mines ,etc,etc and we don't hear you whining about that !

Just try to understand the analogy dum-dum , it was meant to be "out there " to make a point ! They are the same regardless ! You don't have grenades and mines so AK's and AR's will be right there with them ! And still there is no legitimate reason for a civilian to own a assault weapon !

While the socialists here wish to make this a need or don't need thing, the real debate is if th Federal govt has the authority under the Constitution to tell us what guns we may own or not. They of course do NOT have that authority that is why they are appealing to emotion and morons like Fred and Munster.

I didn't think you could aswer that simple question Munster keep squawking, Like the parrot you don't know what you are saying you just like the noise. Here's your cracker.

What a stupid argument! Grenades and mines have never been legal for civilians. You used to be able to purchase explosives, IF you had a valid use for them, with a signature. Now, to even possess explosives requires a blasting license from the BATFE.

Fun fact, the "AR" style rifle was originally made for, and sold to the civilian market, in .308 caliber. When the military adopted a modified version chambered in .223, the original manufacturer, Armalite sold the patent to Colt because they didn't have the production facility capable of producing the quantities the government needed.

There are a million things some Americans have that others don't have, yet nobody is expecting them to justify why they need, or want them. I own one for 2 reasons. One, I could afford to buy one. Two, because I wanted one. I'd shot the same caliber rifle in the Army, I enjoyed shooting them. The same reason I own and shoot M-1 Carbines. The same reason I own and shoot 1911 style pistols.

None

Freddie, you don't "need" a car capable of going 100 MPH either, have you turned your car in yet?

I enjoy target shooting, with a variety of firearms in a variety of calibers. Need doesn't apply to the argument. The FACT is a very small number of firearm deaths each year in America involve any style rifle. The majority of firearm related deaths stem from shooters using handguns. Usually young budding criminals gunned down by their rivals. More young children die each year from rounds shot by these budding criminals, that are intended for their rival, but shooting a handgun sideways just doesn't insure much accuracy, it don't work the way the movies show it.

The decision in Heller stated that "entire classes of firearms, in common use" could not be banned by government. Yes, I know, the firearm in question in that case was a semi-auto handgun, but the principle remains the same.

And you gun nuts never say why exacty you feel you need a military assault weapon !And yes the feds do have the authority to decide what you need or want ! Like I said they don't allow you to have grenades or mines ,etc,etc and we don't hear you whining about that !

You lefties always ask do we need an AR 15. What makes the difference what you think I need or don't need. The the fact is the Federal Govt should not have the power to tell a law abiding citizen what rifle or handguns they can own. Show me where they have the power to ban anything.

... And Munster is correct! You are NOT "losing any Second Amendment rights". There are lots of other kinds of weapons at your disposal - i.e. the keyboard is mightier than the AK-47! Hey, Lewis Wetzel used a muzzle-loader and he "did alright" as a frontier-era serial killer - but, of course, he could only kill ONE Indian at a time before reloading ...

So Stick and the others STILL refuse to say why they think they "need" to own combat-style weapons ... Do they "need" these weapons - which are "combat" weapons because many former military personnel say they are - because shooting them at a range (the ONLY place where most of them are actually used) gives them an adrenaline "rush", OR do they "need" them because they imagine that the "British are coming" to reclaim their former colony, OR do they "need" them because these weapons make them feel like "Rambo"? If either of the last two reasons is the case, there is a possibility that they think they "need" such weapons and endless amounts of ammo because they are CRAZY, and crazy people should not own guns! Duh! Come on guys! Fess up! Which is it? We won't tell anyone your little secret!

Careful idjit !

Your not losing your second amendment rights !! There will be restrictions on military assault weapons ! Just like you cant own hand grenades or mines , etc, etc !!

In every war both sides think that god has sanctioned their efforts ! So what !!This crap has nothing to do with the fact that there is no legitimate reason for a civialian to own a assault weapon !