Devilish34 Posted November 7, 2008 Share Posted November 7, 2008 Nope.... just their ammunition They can't have my ammo but they can have my bullets jk The ammo tax is coming though Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RowdyFan42 Posted November 7, 2008 Share Posted November 7, 2008 The libs are usually against the right to bear arms. Usually. Not always. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TK Posted November 7, 2008 Share Posted November 7, 2008 The Second Amendment is not exactly at the top of the agenda for what ails this country (it's really a non-issue). Obama is not taking away people's guns. All it takes is one nutball with a gun in a school to make this a priority issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerrydevil Posted November 7, 2008 Author Share Posted November 7, 2008 The ammo tax is coming though That would be unfortunate, but wouldn't it stir your patriotic heart to buy bullets and help dig the country out of its financial mess? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deke Posted November 9, 2008 Share Posted November 9, 2008 The libs are usually against the right to bear arms. I dunno James, my ACLU and NRA membership cards are right next to each other in my wallet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ghdi Posted November 9, 2008 Share Posted November 9, 2008 The libs are usually against the right to bear arms. That's a fallacy. Liberals are for gun control, not the elimination of the 2nd amendment. Does any private citizen really need an AK-47 or assault rifles? Just because we have the right to bear arms does not mean that we need to have an armory in our basement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ghdi Posted November 9, 2008 Share Posted November 9, 2008 The ammo tax is coming though Uh oh! What's wrong with an ammo tax? It's like a cigarette tax. Does anyone really buy enough ammo to the point where an ammo tax would be a burden? Police get tax breaks on equipment so it wouldnt affect it from a law enforcement perspective and considering ammo has the potential to take a life and is dangerous in that regard, I see absolutely no problem at all with taxing ammunition. Ammunition is not needed to sustain life except when its self defense and unless you live in a demilitarized zone, a couple of boxes is all anyone outside of ones who use guns in their sports have. Hunting is a sport (even if you kill an animal for food) as is shooting at a range. It's not a necessity outside of that and an ammunition tax would hardly be anything even close to a cigarette tax which is extraordinarily high. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welcometotherock Posted November 10, 2008 Share Posted November 10, 2008 All it takes is one nutball with a gun in a school to make this a priority issue. People kill people, not guns. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerrydevil Posted November 10, 2008 Author Share Posted November 10, 2008 People kill people, not guns. That sounds like something that came straight outta W's mouth! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Devilish34 Posted November 10, 2008 Share Posted November 10, 2008 That sounds like something that came straight outta W's mouth! If guns kill people spoons make Michael Moore fat....ter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Devilish34 Posted November 10, 2008 Share Posted November 10, 2008 That would be unfortunate, but wouldn't it stir your patriotic heart to buy bullets and help dig the country out of its financial mess? Jerry you would be amazed at how many people are buying guns and ammo right now. Some dealers cannot keep some guns in stock. I myself usually use my Christmas and birthday gift cards to stock up. Mostly shot gun shells for use at a sporting clay range. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Devilish34 Posted November 10, 2008 Share Posted November 10, 2008 (edited) Uh oh! What's wrong with an ammo tax? It's like a cigarette tax. Does anyone really buy enough ammo to the point where an ammo tax would be a burden? Police get tax breaks on equipment so it wouldnt affect it from a law enforcement perspective and considering ammo has the potential to take a life and is dangerous in that regard, I see absolutely no problem at all with taxing ammunition. Ammunition is not needed to sustain life except when its self defense and unless you live in a demilitarized zone, a couple of boxes is all anyone outside of ones who use guns in their sports have. Hunting is a sport (even if you kill an animal for food) as is shooting at a range. It's not a necessity outside of that and an ammunition tax would hardly be anything even close to a cigarette tax which is extraordinarily high. Spoken like a true Democrat. What are your hobbies? With that logic lets mandate a fast food tax. Edited November 10, 2008 by Devilish34 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerrydevil Posted November 10, 2008 Author Share Posted November 10, 2008 Jerry you would be amazed at how many people are buying guns and ammo right now.Some dealers cannot keep some guns in stock. I myself usually use my Christmas and birthday gift cards to stock up. Mostly shot gun shells for use at a sporting clay range. I know, I have read the news stories about the scramble to buy guns and ammo since Obama's election. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Devilish34 Posted November 11, 2008 Share Posted November 11, 2008 I know, I have read the news stories about the scramble to buy guns and ammo since Obama's election. I've been eyeing up a M-4 myself or even a M1A just I might have to trade one of my old pre WW2 guns for one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerrydevil Posted November 11, 2008 Author Share Posted November 11, 2008 Wow. I'm not an expert on guns at all, so excuse my ignorance. An M-4 is a machine gun used by the military, right? How can a civilian get one? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Devilish34 Posted November 11, 2008 Share Posted November 11, 2008 Wow. I'm not an expert on guns at all, so excuse my ignorance. An M-4 is a machine gun used by the military, right? How can a civilian get one? Semi auto but you can legally obtain a full auto with a federal permit. $$$$$ I'd much rather a M1A walnut stock match grade. but again $$$$ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SC Devs Fan Posted November 11, 2008 Share Posted November 11, 2008 Went to a gun show this weekend in town - vendors were literally walking the aisles saying "get it now before Obama gets it" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oofrostonoo Posted November 12, 2008 Share Posted November 12, 2008 People kill people, not guns. People who kill people shouldn't be allowed to have ak-47s. This is not 1800, you dont have to worry about people comming on your property and stealing your goats, the right to bear arms doesn't mean right to be able to mow down 30 people in less than 5 seconds Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deke Posted November 12, 2008 Share Posted November 12, 2008 I own, and have owned assault rifles in the past, currently I have a pair of AK-47's and a M-14, usually after I get the "wow I'm shooting a really powerful gun" bug out of my system I sell it off, or retire it to the rack. It's half collecting, half shooting for sport. Some people do take it too far yes, going to the gun range in full tactical gear or claiming they need a grenade launcher attachment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LizDevil30 Posted November 12, 2008 Share Posted November 12, 2008 People who kill people shouldn't be allowed to have ak-47s. This is not 1800, you dont have to worry about people comming on your property and stealing your goats, the right to bear arms doesn't mean right to be able to mow down 30 people in less than 5 seconds The vast amount of people that own guns don't want to mow anyone down. The ones that do, will find a way regardless of gun laws. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Devilish34 Posted November 14, 2008 Share Posted November 14, 2008 I own, and have owned assault rifles in the past, currently I have a pair of AK-47's and a M-14, usually after I get the "wow I'm shooting a really powerful gun" bug out of my system I sell it off, or retire it to the rack. It's half collecting, half shooting for sport. Some people do take it too far yes, going to the gun range in full tactical gear or claiming they need a grenade launcher attachment. This part is so true and also funny esp when you see how silly they look. Are your AK's real as in from Russia or?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Devilish34 Posted November 14, 2008 Share Posted November 14, 2008 People who kill people shouldn't be allowed to have ak-47s. This is not 1800, you dont have to worry about people comming on your property and stealing your goats, the right to bear arms doesn't mean right to be able to mow down 30 people in less than 5 seconds No they are coming to steal your valuables just like the 2 families I know that got rob recently. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deke Posted November 15, 2008 Share Posted November 15, 2008 Are your AK's real as in from Russia or?? One is legit, one is some strange knock off that has really really bad recoil. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts