• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Gun Ownership

What weapons should civilians be allowed to own?


  • Total voters
    26

Graffias

Rogue
Joined
Apr 29, 2011
Messages
924
Reaction score
309
Location
Midwest U.S
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Socialist
What weapons should civilians be allowed to own?
 
Last edited:
In the grand scheme of things I really don't have a big problem with civilians owning artillery, heavy weapons, bombers and aircraft carriers either. Hell, there are already people that own WWII era bombers and fighters. I would be a little hesitant to afford the general public access to nuclear arms and other heavy munitions though I really don't have a problem with people owning the equipment which launches such objects.

Personally, I'd really like to own a battleship and have someone let me "borrow" a couple of dozen 16" shells and a few tons of powder.
 
I would draw the line at fully automatic rifles like the military uses. Civilians should not have access to military ordnance or heavier weapons.
 
Damn, I really want an auto-cannon, but I think that's where I would draw the line.
 
Current (federal) measures are fairly okay. Weapons of mass-murder (artillery, etc.).... Yeah, I would keep those out of the General Pop's hands and require some fairly thorough liscencing laws, but leave them legal.
 
What weapons should civilians be allowed to own?

as a base level-every weapon that any civilian employee of the government (state or federal) can use because the state has decreed those weapons useful for self defense in urban areas.

when you get to individually used and issued military weapons the area becomes a little more murky.


weapons that do have international or interstate ramifications, I believe the federal government has a power to restrict (Nukes, bio weapons, poison gas etc)
 
If I could edit this poll, I would change the last option so that WMD's are not included (of course, some people feel the definition of WMD is open to interpretation.) Anyway, people who choose the last option should be those who believe that civilians should be allowed to own weapons that are used exclusively by the military and don't fall into any of the other categories.
 
Back
Top Bottom