Is this the gun with the bullet that "tumbles"?
If forced to choose a gun an M4 would do just fine. Truck is still cheaper and easier to obtain.
Is this the gun with the bullet that "tumbles"?
Instead of asking here you should do a bunch of google searches on what guns kill people at venues most effectively.
The burning man festival says no driving allowed?
How do they all get there?
And Is this rule only when one starts to illustrate one's unique abilities?
I’m sure the Vegas concert said no shooting people dead allowed too.
Any place where people are dense. Easier Church, bar, ....
Difficult: airports, sports events, concerts,
I kinda got that. With a variant of an AK.
So do we ban AKs; and large trucks at the burning man festival?
Bump stock, what? How do we handle the most efficient kill-awhole-lotta-peeps-quickly guns?
Leave em alone?
Actually it did not.
The driving thing was enacted because oddly, people were run over... Go figure out in that flat sand. All those people. Spring break they don't allow driving on some beaches for the same thing. Which could be a really bad spot for 2 paired wolves, one driving and crushing, and one AK shooting. But I'm thinking the guy shooting does a "better" job. Low tide would be preferable as well. Or maybe not... high tide might smash more beach goers together.
SCOTUS was also quite clear on confiscating someone's legally obtained weapon.
If you're under 21 you could buy a cheap truck off of Craigslist or at a used car lot. No restrictions on that.
You really are a weird mother er
And you.... You... overstarch your shirts.
Lighten up Francis.
- Seargeant Hulka
Other than "cheaper", the le of the article very literally refutes your statement almost word for word.
How do you kill the kids inside the school building with your truck
No, I just have them pressed, light starch.
Don't they ever come outside?
Yes because Home Depot is the only place to rent a truck in the USA.
Stop pretending you know about any of it. You're just pulling guesses out of your ass.
The 2nd Amendment isn't about militias. It's about the pre-existing right to keep and bear arms. It simply stated a condition for making that statement, it didn't say the right hinged on needing a militia. The 2nd Amendment didn't grant the right to bear arms. It existed already.
These are not guesses starch fella, they are questions because I don't know guns. Your F'N rigid brain... You think cars and trucks work well indoors to kill people? I did not think you were a monster truck kinda guy that went to the Alamodome and got sprayed with dirt. Do they even do this anymore?
Yes.
And surprisingly, they disperse. Especially after school.
Im an expert.
This was a tough one.
Wanna compare international murders by vehicle versus intentional murders by firearms worldwide?
I wanna.
Last edited by Isitjustme?; 03-16-2018 at 01:13 AM.
It's a weak argument, IMO. Just like "militia" at the time of the founder's has little resemblance to militia today.
Except for the part where it explicitly mentions militias right in the first half of the first sentence!
C'mon bro I mean seriously. It even says regulated right there! not "A nutty group of disparate gun nut kooks, being necessary for the security of a free state the right of the kooks with firearm fetishes to have home arsenals.."
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)