And why should the public have access to these again?

[BlueWahooChambordDevil]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: R13</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Comparing weed and crack is pretty differnt than comparing guns killing cops or kids like in the stories I posted. </div></div>
not really

both arent legal yet both are still on the streets

[Ironlung]

No, it's not. If there's something that a segment of the population can get and want that is taken away from them, they will resort to extreme violence to get it. I agree with you, I don't really see a need for those weapons. Making them illegal does nothing but instigates more violence by the people that will do anything to get them. When Regan started the "war on drugs" and tried to basically stop any drug trading, crimes among blacks and inner city residents skyrocketed and they've never really went down.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> Fact it they should be banned all together from the public. </div></div>

This is not a fact, this in an opinion.

[BlueWahooChambordDevil]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Fact it they should be banned all together from the public.</div></div>
the constitution says otherwise

[R13]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Ironlung</div><div class="ubbcode-body">No, it's not. If there's something that a segment of the population can get and want that is taken away from them, they will resort to extreme violence to get it. I agree with you, I don't really see a need for those weapons. Making them illegal does nothing but instigates more violence by the people that will do anything to get them. When Regan started the "war on drugs" and tried to basically stop any drug trading, crimes among blacks and inner city residents skyrocketed and they've never really went down.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> Fact it they should be banned all together from the public. </div></div>

This is not a fact, this in an opinion. </div></div>

But drugs were already on a rise at that time anyways, granted it contributed to it but it was bad timing. To me you cant try and stop something like that when its on a rise like it was, because it would eventually even out and decline somewhat without any ban. Right now there is not a rise in the crimes and it wouldnt make it skyrocket because its not a growing problem, but still problems like the accidents we have been talking about. On the streets it wont have that much on an impact, but could very well have an impact on incidents like these. Gangs are going to kill each other either way so I dont have sympathy for them, but I do with case like these and IMO think it could prevent a lot of them. And you are right thats a opinion, but I see it as a fact lol.

[R13]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: BlueWahooChambor</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Fact it they should be banned all together from the public.</div></div>
the constitution says otherwise </div></div>

IMO its abusing an outdated part of the constitution.

[BlueWahooChambordDevil]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: R13</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: BlueWahooChambor</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Fact it they should be banned all together from the public.</div></div>
the constitution says otherwise </div></div>

IMO its abusing an outdated part of the constitution. </div></div>
who are you to determine whats outdated?

then im saying the part that gives everybody the right to vote is outdated and you cant vote because you arent smart enbough

[R13]

Its obvious its outdated and misused to me. People read it 2 different ways, they ignore the first part referring to militia and see only right to bear arms and other read the whole thing and understand what it is referring to - militia should have the right to be armed.

And if you moved the voting age, then they would need to move the draft age.

[BlueWahooChambordDevil]

define militia?

a militia can be formed by anybody a any time for any reason

see the michigan militia for exhibit A

[BlueWahooChambordDevil]

http://www.michiganmilitia.com/

these groups exist in almost every state and can be joined by just about anybody

[R13]

So everyone who owns these weapons or any gun for that matter are militia? At the time the militia was groups of people like farmers who organized to protect their state. Thats definitely not the case these days, so you cant call yourself militia in todays age to defend your right to have a weapon like that. No purpose to have them, meaning no reason they should have access.