According to Congresss they are. An assault weapon is much like Congress, it is all about apperance and nothing to do with actual function.
Is it against the Constitution to ban assault weapons?
- Thread starter toyotastunner
- Start date
According to Congresss they are. An assault weapon is much like Congress, it is all about apperance and nothing to do with actual function.
That's very true.
Here's a thought. We make local, state and federal govt, employees contractors, etc... Have to abide by the same laws as the general public. Ie they ban assault rifles, limit mags, then law enforcement has to do the same. The only exception will be the military. You know since ARs and high cap mags are designed to kill mass people and all, why do cops or federal agents need them. Also, congress would have to have obamacare too. No exceptions.
It would seem by history that gun control (the bann of certian weapons) is not unconstitutional. I hope history does not repeat itself. Perhaps in the past, enough pressure was not put on the elected officials. I guess that it was not against guns, but more about what the gun looked like, and the perception the public had about the weapon. I really can't begin to think what will happen. I agree that we should make our stance known and we should support the organizations who have our same views. There will have to be some give and take on both sides. I do believe that it will be a heated and drawn out debate. In the end I do expect the background investigation will be tightened, and that there will be a limit on the capacity of magazines. If anything, I hope this would be the biggest changes (if there had to be any changes). Otherwise, the mention of a revolution has been made. People are tired of the government. It may just happen, and I will be there with my AR, AK and all of my thirty round clips.
Last edited:
