View Poll Results: Which should be legal for average citizens to own and use?

Voters
60. You may not vote on this poll
  • VX

    10 16.67%
  • Aersol Ebola

    9 15.00%
  • Nuclear Weapons

    6 10.00%
  • Jet Fighters with full munitions

    20 33.33%
  • Claymores and Mines

    29 48.33%
  • Anti-Armor Missiles

    27 45.00%
  • Machine Guns

    40 66.67%
  • Handguns

    57 95.00%
  • Automatic Rifles

    49 81.67%
Multiple Choice Poll.
Page 1 of 26 12311 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 258

Thread: Limits to Private Arsenals

  1. #1
    Equal Opportunity Hater
    obvious Child's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    0.0, -2.3 on the Political Compass
    Last Seen
    12-09-14 @ 10:36 PM
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    19,883

    Limits to Private Arsenals

    So in a discussion with a nameless handle, he agreed that the average citizen should have the legal right to own any and all kinds of armaments. I'd like to see just what the rest of the forum agrees should be legal and what the rest of you people think about the list.
    "If your opponent is of choleric temperament, seek to irritate him." - Sun Tzu

  2. #2
    Sage
    Ikari's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:27 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    48,249

    Re: Limits to Private Arsenals

    I stopped short of the chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons. I'm not even sure if governments should have those things, though that's not going to change. The fully loaded jet fighter isn't much of an issue due to cost, maintenance, and fuel concerns so go ahead. You forgot tanks as well.
    You know the time is right to take control, we gotta take offense against the status quo

    Quote Originally Posted by A. de Tocqueville
    "I should have loved freedom, I believe, at all times, but in the time in which we live I am ready to worship it."

  3. #3
    Sage
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Last Seen
    08-27-09 @ 06:41 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    6,344

    Re: Limits to Private Arsenals

    VX and aerosol ebola being chemical and biological in nature, are not "arms" and thus are not subject to the protections of the Second Amendment.

    All the rest of the items on the list should be fair game, in my opinion.

  4. #4
    Educator nerv14's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Last Seen
    02-07-11 @ 06:24 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    601

    Re: Limits to Private Arsenals

    I think people should be able to have any weapon that a "normal soldier" would have and by that I just mean basically all types of guns, and nothing more.

    So thats no nuclear weapons, anti-tank missles or deadly bioweapons. Just normal firearms.

  5. #5
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Chicago
    Last Seen
    04-02-15 @ 04:08 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    8,211

    Re: Limits to Private Arsenals

    I don't really see the point in outlawing biological or chemical weapons, or tanks, or rocket launchers, or jet fighters. If someone has the means to acquire any of these weapons then a law isn't going to make a bit of difference to these people. Do we honestly think that someone who has the means and desire to obtain these things is going to pay any attention to a law that bans them? So, whatever, ban them, don't ban them, it doesn't really matter. You might as well ban super-powers while you're at it...

  6. #6
    Liberal Fascist For Life!

    Redress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:58 AM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    86,455
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Limits to Private Arsenals

    You did not select an option to vote for. Please press back to return to the poll and choose an option before voting.
    I can't select the option I would really like to.

    In seriousness, of those on the list, I only think handguns should be allowed, or in other words, about what is legal now.

  7. #7
    Equal Opportunity Hater
    obvious Child's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    0.0, -2.3 on the Political Compass
    Last Seen
    12-09-14 @ 10:36 PM
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    19,883

    Re: Limits to Private Arsenals

    Quote Originally Posted by celticlord View Post
    VX and aerosol ebola being chemical and biological in nature
    So are nuclear weapons which rely upon a series of chemical and physical reactions to work. What does chemical and biological have to do with separating them?

    are not "arms" and thus are not subject to the protections of the Second Amendment.
    Huh? A missile containing a conventional warhead is an arm, but a missile containing a chemical payload is not an arm?

    Huh? That makes little sense. Especially since conventional weapons rely upon chemical reactions to produce energy. The only difference is that instead of producing a big explosion, it releases chemical agents.

    Pepper spray is fully legal. And it's biological is nature. Replace the pepper with Ebola and how is that any different aside from sheer killing capacity?
    Last edited by obvious Child; 06-08-09 at 04:20 PM.
    "If your opponent is of choleric temperament, seek to irritate him." - Sun Tzu

  8. #8
    Sage
    Dav's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Virginia
    Last Seen
    04-16-16 @ 12:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    5,539

    Re: Limits to Private Arsenals

    One of the things about belonging to a political forum is, the people there seem so obsessed with politics they subscribe to ideologies rather than common sense.

    Common sense is, there is no reason to let people own anything more powerful than a handgun or a rifle. Nuclear weapons are not required for self-defense and putting them in the hands of anyone who wants them creates a threat to humanity.

  9. #9
    Equal Opportunity Hater
    obvious Child's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    0.0, -2.3 on the Political Compass
    Last Seen
    12-09-14 @ 10:36 PM
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    19,883

    Re: Limits to Private Arsenals

    Quote Originally Posted by Ethereal View Post
    I don't really see the point in outlawing biological or chemical weapons, or tanks, or rocket launchers, or jet fighters.
    While I understand what you are arguing, that's not the focus of the argument. This is meant for the average citizens to own. Not for the illegal, non-average questionably terrorist whack who's out to get weapons to cause mass destruction and death. Should average citizens be allowed to have such weapons legally?
    "If your opponent is of choleric temperament, seek to irritate him." - Sun Tzu

  10. #10
    Sage
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Last Seen
    08-27-09 @ 06:41 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    6,344

    Re: Limits to Private Arsenals

    Quote Originally Posted by obvious Child View Post
    So are nuclear weapons which rely upon a series of chemical and physical reactions to work. What does chemical and biological have to do with separating them?
    The earth-shattering KABOOM!

    Quote Originally Posted by obvious Child View Post
    Huh? A missile containing a conventional warhead is an arm, but a missile containing a chemical payload is not an arm?
    Exactly. Again, the distinction is the earth-shattering KABOOM!

    Quote Originally Posted by obvious Child View Post
    Huh? That makes little sense.
    And aerosol Ebola does?

    Quote Originally Posted by obvious Child View Post
    Pepper spray is fully legal. And it's biological is nature. Replace the pepper with Ebola and how is that any different aside from sheer killing capacity?
    Pepper spray is not fully legal. Some jurisdictions do not allow it.

    And they can, because it is not an "arm", and thus there is no fundamental right to pepper spray.

Page 1 of 26 12311 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •