• 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!

Which weapons should be legal to personally own?

Which weapons should be legal to personally own? (select as many as apply)

  • All types of handguns

    Votes: 51 81.0%

  • A fully automatic AK-47

    Votes: 41 65.1%

  • A fully automatic M-16

    Votes: 40 63.5%

  • a pipe bomb

    Votes: 25 39.7%

  • dynamite

    Votes: 35 55.6%

  • an atomic bomb

    Votes: 11 17.5%

  • none of the above

    Votes: 10 15.9%
  • Total voters
    63
Kandahar said:
Guns are illegal in Australia? I didn't know that. Honestly I never would've guessed...
Click to expand...

So are small boobs in porn. As well as Left 4 Dead 2 (well they got a "reworked" version without the gore). I'm not one to really endorse much on the banning side. I think the rights and the liberties of the individual are what should reign supreme over all.
 
jamesrage said:
Anything the military and law enforcement can get.
Click to expand...

Why the hell can't civilians get those pepper-spray OC paint balls, bean-bag shot gun rounds or flash suppressors anyway?
 
mikhail said:
Every man is a responsible gun owner till they shoot their wife.
Click to expand...

funny_dog_pictures_dont_like.jpg
 
I only selected the ones for which ownership should be an inalienable right. I would have clicked on dynamite, too... except that I think any form of significant explosives should be licensed.

Handguns and automatic rifles ought to be a matter of showing proof of your age and citizenship and walking out the same day. Machine guns and anti-materiel weapons should be licensed. Not even governments should be allowed to own weapos of mass destruction.
 
Gernade launchers.

I got some squirrels in my back yard that are driving me nuts.
 
Ikari said:
So are small boobs in porn. As well as Left 4 Dead 2 (well they got a "reworked" version without the gore). I'm not one to really endorse much on the banning side. I think the rights and the liberties of the individual are what should reign supreme over all.
Click to expand...

I really thought you were joking about the small boobs ban until I googled it. Human stupidity never ceases to amaze me. :doh
 
Bodhisattva said:
You voted none because they should be regulated? They are regulated. The question is which ones should be legal to own.
Click to expand...

Except the last, all of them are legal to own with the right credentials and/or grandfather clauses? So is the question one of banning (making them illegal) or removing restrictions (making them completely legal)?
I chose the question to mean the latter.

And as I believe that firearms can't practically be banned, they should be controlled. As such none of the list would be legal in every circumstance.

Hence my answer.
 
As long as they have authorization and a license, the first three should be fine.

The rest are for professional and governmental ownership alone.
 
Handguns and dynamite definitely, those are already legal and have legitimate uses. Pipe bombs no, I honestly can see no legitimate use for those. Nuclear weapons are clearly ridiculous. Fully automatic weapons I'm a bit more on the fence about. I can't see much of a legitimate use for personal ownership of them to be quite honest, but I also can't see a lot of harm in it either.
 
Alvin T. Grey said:
Except the last, all of them are legal to own with the right credentials and/or grandfather clauses? So is the question one of banning (making them illegal) or removing restrictions (making them completely legal)?
I chose the question to mean the latter.

And as I believe that firearms can't practically be banned, they should be controlled. As such none of the list would be legal in every circumstance.

Hence my answer.
Click to expand...

They already are "controlled". You have to be checked on NICS (national instant check system computers) when you buy any gun. If you are a felon, nutter, etc then red flags pop up and you are denied. At least in theory...prosecutions have been lacking.

Auto and selective fire require a Class III license, considered a "collector" type status, and certain conditions regarding storage (serious gunsafe, etc).

In most states legal carry requires a CCW, which in 40 states is easily obtained if you're not a felon, nutter, etc. The main thing I think needs to be changed is all-state national reciprocity (recognition of other state's carry permits.) As it is now, I have to have three CCW's (home state and two others) to be able to carry in almost 40 states...and there's still a few states I can't carry in. (I don't go there, lol.)
 
Am I correct in thinking that certain banned components (30rnd magazines etc) were legal to own and sell as long as they were in posession before the ban? - Hence grandfathered? Or was that just for collectors (class III?)
 
Goshin said:
They already are "controlled". You have to be checked on NICS (national instant check system computers) when you buy any gun. If you are a felon, nutter, etc then red flags pop up and you are denied. At least in theory...prosecutions have been lacking.
Click to expand...
Over here you apply for your license. Depending on your reason for application you are permitted to own as many firearms of that specific type. Should you wish to amend your license to include other types permission must be sought again.
However a recent high court decision means that subsequent applications are on a "shall issue" basis depending on the calibre required.

Auto and selective fire require a Class III license,
Click to expand...
Illegal as hell here. Semi auto only.
considered a "collector" type status, and certain conditions regarding storage (serious gunsafe, etc).
Click to expand...
That's standard for all fire arms here, and the firearms officer inspects same on a yearly basis (at license renewal)
So much so that I now keep my guns at the club.

In most states legal carry requires a CCW, which in 40 states is easily obtained if you're not a felon, nutter, etc. The main thing I think needs to be changed is all-state national reciprocity (recognition of other state's carry permits.) As it is now, I have to have three CCW's (home state and two others) to be able to carry in almost 40 states...and there's still a few states I can't carry in. (I don't go there, lol.)
Click to expand...
CCW for pistols is very rarely authorized here. Except for the purpose of transportation.
It is highly illegal to open carry.
 
jamesrage said:
Anything the military and law enforcement can get.


See my signature-

The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.
Thomas Jefferson

Kind of hard to do that if only the criminals and government have high powered weapons.
Click to expand...

I almost want to agree.

But in reality most people can't handle what they 8are* permitted to have, let alone what law enforcement has.

It would just give the upper hand to the wrong people.
 
Alvin T. Grey said:
Am I correct in thinking that certain banned components (30rnd magazines etc) were legal to own and sell as long as they were in posession before the ban? - Hence grandfathered? Or was that just for collectors (class III?)
Click to expand...

That ban has expired, so items like 30rnd magazines are legal again.

Funny how the world didn't fall apart when the ban was lifted, aye?
 
Jerry said:
That ban has expired, so items like 30rnd magazines are legal again.

Funny how the world didn't fall apart when the ban was lifted, aye?
Click to expand...

It was my understanding that they were still in circulation (at a higher price) during the ban. You just couldn't get new ones.
Or is that incorrect?
 
Kandahar said:
I really thought you were joking about the small boobs ban until I googled it. Human stupidity never ceases to amaze me. :doh
Click to expand...

Nope, sure wasn't. Apparently, small boobs encourage pedophilia or something. Maybe they'll force all women to get boob jobs in the future to make sure...don't know. I think they've banned alcohol and porn for the aborigines as well (or they were talking about it and didn't quite pass it). The point is, Australia is ban happy and I don't think we should necessarily follow suit.
 
Last edited:
Jerry said:
Why the hell can't civilians get those pepper-spray OC paint balls, bean-bag shot gun rounds or flash suppressors anyway?
Click to expand...

Probably because it is the same anti-2nd amendment nuts who ban other weapons and require fire arm registrations and other anti-2nd amendment laws in liberal states.
 
Alvin T. Grey said:
It was my understanding that they were still in circulation (at a higher price) during the ban. You just couldn't get new ones.
Or is that incorrect?
Click to expand...

Pre-ban weapons could be sold privately, yes. This is why the American Left went ape-**** over gun shows. The Left enacted a ban and everyone just ignored it by purchasing from gun shows instead of licensed dealers.
 
Alvin T. Grey said:
Over here you apply for your license. Depending on your reason for application you are permitted to own as many firearms of that specific type. Should you wish to amend your license to include other types permission must be sought again.
However a recent high court decision means that subsequent applications are on a "shall issue" basis depending on the calibre required.


Illegal as hell here. Semi auto only.
That's standard for all fire arms here, and the firearms officer inspects same on a yearly basis (at license renewal)
So much so that I now keep my guns at the club.


CCW for pistols is very rarely authorized here. Except for the purpose of transportation.
It is highly illegal to open carry.
Click to expand...





Here in the USA, I would consider those rules to be intolerably oppressive.

If you like it like that, well (shrug) more power to ya. Not over here though. I'd revolt, and I wouldn't be alone.
 
None of the above.
How about love and tolerance, instead.
There are many who wish to return to a more barbarous time, where only the strongest and best armed survived..
GO
I wish for peace.
Am I the only one?
 
earthworm said:
None of the above.
How about love and tolerance, instead.
There are many who wish to return to a more barbarous time, where only the strongest and best armed survived..
GO
I wish for peace.
Am I the only one?
Click to expand...

Yes.



...............
 
Jerry said:
Yes.



...............
Click to expand...

Good answer,Jerry.
And this bothers me not.
There are others in this world, who have controlled their racism, fears, intolerance.
The keyword is control, but, for me, this is nowhere close to 100%.
 
earthworm said:
Good answer,Jerry.
And this bothers me not.
There are others in this world, who have controlled their racism, fears, intolerance.
The keyword is control, but, for me, this is nowhere close to 100%.
Click to expand...

When those who can't control themselves try to act against me, I retain the right and the ability to defend myself. Therefore, I carry.
 
As if a 'ban' prevents criminals from getting the weapons they want.

Put another way...thank goodness we have a ban on Heroin and cocaine...otherwise we might have a drug problem!

All handguns and semiautomatic rifles ought to be legal nationwide. The law requiring federal license for fully automatic weapons also makes sense.
 
Anythng that falls under the definition of 'arms' as the term is used in the Constitution.

This clearly includes any class of firearm you care to mention.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom