|
|
|
NOTE!
This is a real-time comments system. As such, it's also a
free speech zone within guidelines set forth on the Post
Comments page. Opinions expressed here may or may not
reflect those of KeepAndBearArms staff, members, or
any other living person besides the one who posted them.
Please keep that in mind. We ask that all who post
comments assure that they adhere to our Inclusion
Policy, but there's a bad apple in every
bunch, and we have no control over bigots and
other small-minded people. Thank you. --KeepAndBearArms.com
|
The
Below Comments Relate to this Newslink:
Not All Americans Have The Right To Bear Arms
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
are 2 comments
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
There are also limits to the types of firearms that can be owned by individuals without special licenses. Semi-automatic handguns and rifles are legal to own, but fully automatic weapons are only legal for police, the military, and persons with special licenses. In addition there are limits to the type of ammunition that can be owned by private individuals. Learn more about federal gun laws as well as laws that vary by state from this infographic! |
| Comment by:
MarkHamTownsend
(8/19/2016)
|
" ... fully automatic weapons are only legal for police, the military, and persons with special licenses...."
Not perzactly. IF you live in a state which permits the ownership of full-auto, the weapon must be on tha National Firearms Registry, MUST be made before 1986 and one MUST have the tax stamp for it, having paid the $200.00 tax. It's NOT a "special permit"...it's a TAX. And yes it is unconstitutional but it IS the "LAW." |
| Comment by:
laker1
(8/19/2016)
|
| Since police arrive after the fact with full auto, we the people , the first responders to violent crime, should be disadvantaged and not allowed full auto. Liberal logic/oxymoron. |
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| No kingdom can be secured otherwise than by arming the people. The possession of arms is the distinction between a freeman and a slave. He, who has nothing, and who himself belongs to another, must be defended by him, whose property he is, and needs no arms. But he, who thinks he is his own master, and has what he can call his own, ought to have arms to defend himself, and what he possesses; else he lives precariously, and at discretion. — James Burgh, Political Disquisitions: Or, an Enquiry into Public Errors, Defects, and Abuses [London, 1774-1775]. |
|
|
