ewurm;2954518; said:
i agree, armed civilians are the least i would worry about. i would worry about nukes.
in WW2 we ended the war in japan with two bombs, not by invading it and losing more lives.
An experiment: Please define these "gun" terms
- Thread starter JD7.62
- Start date
i agree, armed civilians are the least i would worry about. i would worry about nukes.
in WW2 we ended the war in japan with two bombs, not by invading it and losing more lives.
did poland have personal arms? i doo understnd that personal arms rank 0 among millitary powers but..... must be taken into ?. no way they will get a ground attack in the u.s.
if they dont care about the actual land then they dont, but if they want to clame this as thier own they wont level it.ewurm;2954548; said:
unstopablepuffers;2954562; said:
As evidenced by their behavior, they don't want this land as their own. Who are you talking about? There hasn't been anybody since the colonial period that has wanted this land as their own except "us". "Us" would be everyone except the Native American population.
i think we should get rid of permits. everyone gets to carry. but you f up you go away along time. and bad and good guys are on the same level
yes all of our ( you and i) foes, dont really want say indiana. but they dont not want it either. correct? any anti u.s. naTION would be happy to have a hold anywhereewurm;2954575; said:
unstopablepuffers;2954583; said:
Carry what? This thread is about assault weapons. Should everyone have a sling and an AK? Grenades? Or a handgun? I don't feel any safer if I have a handgun walking into North Minneapolis. I don't walk through North Minneapolis. I let the police deal with the morons. And as far as safety, I'm much more worried about dieing in a car accident than in an an assault involving a gun. The numbers are there for the viewing. Cars are more dangerous than guns, even in this country.
