People do not need assault weapons: d...

People do not need assault weapons: defense secretary

There are 4995 comments on the Reuters story from Jan 17, 2013, titled People do not need assault weapons: defense secretary. In it, Reuters reports that:

Defense Secretary Leon Panetta joined the gun control debate on Thursday when he told troops at a military base in Italy that only soldiers needed armor-piercing bullets or assault weapons.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Reuters.

Patriot

Boulder, CO

#980 Jan 23, 2013
“Who are the militia? Are they not Ourselves? Is it feared, then, that we shall turn Our arms each man gainst his own bosom. Congress has no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birthright of an American…”– Tench Coxe 1788

http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Tench_Coxe

“Si vis pacem, para bellum !!”

Since: Dec 07

Southeast Virginia

#981 Jan 23, 2013
Buffalo Bull wrote:
<quoted text>
you still avoided answering the crux of the question which was military grade weapons, do you draw a distinction between civilian arms and military arms.
If so where do you draw that line
If no explain your rationale.
That depends. What is YOUR definition of "military grade" weapons?

“Si vis pacem, para bellum !!”

Since: Dec 07

Southeast Virginia

#982 Jan 23, 2013
WeTheSheeple wrote:
<quoted text>
Obviously the people are the militia; without the people there would have been no militia, nor the eventual Army, Navy, Marines, & Air Force.
It's the "well regulated militia" which makes it MORE than just every person. It's the well regulated (state) militia (person).
LMAO!!!! You really need to get an education before you further embarrass yourself. Please post ANY reference you can find stating that the Founder's definition of "well regulated" meant "state". I will NOT be holding my breath.

That was quite possibly the the most ignorant, lame-ass things I have ever heard regarding the 2nd-A. And I thought I had just about heard them all. I literally LOL'd at that. Thanks.

“Uzi Does It”

Since: Nov 08

UZILAND

#983 Jan 23, 2013
Richard_ wrote:
<quoted text>Let me make this perfectly clear, at one time I was on the fence post regarding abortion, now I'm pro abortion. Why? Because leftist feminist women using their own will and resources to kill off future leftist children, will mean less crime and less entitlement people running around.
Democrat females having abortions does make for lest leftist babies to grow up and fill the prisons or suck from the government's teat.

“Uzi Does It”

Since: Nov 08

UZILAND

#984 Jan 23, 2013
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
Of course there is a loophole.
You are a m/f c/s liar.
But we knew that.
Not all tables at a gun show are licensed dealers.
As we all know.
And of course there are exceptions in those states where people like me changed the laws and required that all guns sold in the gun shows go through a background check.
Something to be coming to those states that don't.
Why bother to drag a firearm to a gun show to sell it when one can do so legally over the internet, LOL.

“O'er the land of the free ? ”

Since: Jan 09

Don't Tread On Me

#985 Jan 23, 2013
Armed Veteran wrote:
<quoted text>
That depends. What is YOUR definition of "military grade" weapons?
Exactly.

“Uzi Does It”

Since: Nov 08

UZILAND

#986 Jan 23, 2013
The main thing is that if there is a registration law that creates a huge black market industry in illegal firearms transactions it that the law itself will wind up bankrupting the tax payer, who is now government by a government who borrows 40 cents on every dollar it spends and is headed fast toward a 20 trillion dollar deficit. The feds don't have the money for this, they don't have the money to be sending troops to Africa, either. LOL.
Brown Girl in the Ring

UK

#987 Jan 23, 2013
Its very satisfying to know that a black woman can influence someone in making the right decisions even a dick head.
Brown Girl in the Ring

Winsford, UK

#988 Jan 23, 2013
downhill246 wrote:
<quoted text>
The Columbine shooters were atheists.They were probably talking to people like you..
Busted!!
It must be very frustrating for you to see yr life rapidly going downhill.
Brown Girl in the Ring

UK

#989 Jan 23, 2013
Where Is My America wrote:
<quoted text>Exactly.
The suggestion that the 2nd A is being taken away is ridiculous. At the end of the day it needs to be amended, updated and more clearly defined.
Marauder

Anchorage, AK

#990 Jan 24, 2013
Wall Street Government wrote:
<quoted text>
Great, then I dont have to cancel my order for that M-1 Abrams and my AH helocopter.
If the M-1 Abrams and the AH Helicopter are "bearable arms"...then you are correct.

So how far can you carry either one of those...?...oh wait, you gotta be able to pick it up first.
Marauder

Anchorage, AK

#991 Jan 24, 2013
Wall Street Government wrote:
<quoted text>
DUH!, Dumbshit.
That was in responce to a comment.
Next........
DUH!, Dumbshit.

The other post was in responce to your BS comment.

Next...

“Constitutionist/ SAF”

Since: Mar 08

Location hidden

#992 Jan 24, 2013
Only a poser would bother refuting this type of comment.
Tory II wrote:
Antigun sheriff instigates shooting rampages:

http://www.kvoa.com/news/sheriff-dupnik-speak...
http://www.kvoa.com/news/sheriff-dupnik-speak...

The Sandy Hook school shooting was instigated by local police.
Marauder

Anchorage, AK

#993 Jan 24, 2013
WeTheSheeple wrote:
<quoted text>
Then that would have to include tactical nuclear weapons which are also "bearable arms".
You would think...but I'm sure they would get around that as not being "small arms"...or that the control of such weapons as nuclear weapons comes under the active and "standing army" of the Federal Gov't...NOT the militia...and are NOT necessary for the "security of a free State."

The Heller case in refering to the Miller case stated this;

"Miller’s holding that the sorts of weapons protected are those “in common use at the time” finds support in the historical tradition of prohibiting the carrying of dangerous and unusual weapons."

Nuclear weapons would fall under that finding.

Bringing up the "nuclear" option continually only shows the weakness in your own argument. There have been some on here that seem to believe they do have a right to such weapons. They are being just as "frivolous" as those that argue the 2nd Amendment only covers "muskets".
Marauder

Anchorage, AK

#994 Jan 24, 2013
WeTheSheeple wrote:
<quoted text>
Since when? We safely store thousand of nuclear arms right now and that doesn't infringe on any else's rights.
I could just as easily say assault weapons can't be safely stored without infringing on another's rights.
Your point was just shredded.
You have been just as shredded.
Marauder

Anchorage, AK

#995 Jan 24, 2013
WeTheSheeple wrote:
<quoted text>
Why doesn't it?
If "arms" in the 2nd amendment covers semi-automatic assault rifles or machine guns which weren't invented at the time, then it covers ALL arms which weren't invented yet.
Asked and answered.
Marauder

Anchorage, AK

#996 Jan 24, 2013
Wall Street Government wrote:
<quoted text>
About 3 gallons per mile.
5 on the freeway.
That's why teabaggers love them.
Gotta keep them profits up.
Shouldn't need any fuel if it's a "bearable arm".
Marauder

Anchorage, AK

#997 Jan 24, 2013
Sheik Yerbouti wrote:
Just who gets to define 'assault' weapons? I own a fully operational WW2 M1 carbine. Would my rifle fall under the category of an 'assault' weapon.
It does in the "NEW" AWB being proposed.
Pete

Bethel, CT

#998 Jan 24, 2013
t clms wrote:
<quoted text>No wonder you hate gun owners, cretin!!

I'm a typical nigger coward. I can't leave my pathetic section 8 home without a gun. I'm scared of everyone.
At least you admit it, chimp.
serfs up

Melbourne, FL

#999 Jan 24, 2013
Wall Street Government wrote:
<quoted text>
Everyone knows that Tea Party revolutionaries fear and hate socialism about as much as the Antichrist. Which is funny, because the Tea Party movement’s dirty little secret is that it owes its existence to the grandaddy of all Antichrists: the godless empire of the USSR.
What few realize is that the secretive oil billionaires of the Koch family, the main supporters of the right-wing groups that orchestrated the Tea Party movement, would not have the means to bankroll their favorite causes had it not been for the pile of money the family made working for the Bolsheviks in the late 1920s and early 1930s, building refineries, training Communist engineers and laying down the foundation of Soviet oil infrastructure.
Here is a better historical fact, one that the Kochs don’t like to repeat in public: the family’s initial wealth was not created by the harsh, creative forces of unfettered capitalism, but by the grace of the centrally-planned economy of the Soviet Union. This deserves repeating: The Koch family, America’s biggest pushers of the free-market Tea Party revolution, would not be the billionaires they are today were it not for the whim of one of Stalin’s comrades.
Poor "marxist" nut job teabagger.
Thats right Wall Street, everyday those tea party cretins wake up and read the atrocious "tea party manifesto". Those nasty Koch brothers who of course have no equivalent on the progressive Dem side of a nation taken over by elitists whose goal is world government. Figure it out. But I warn you. You might be called a hater by most, including your own.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Guns Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News The news media love America. The government, no... Sep 22 Erl 63
LAX Ammo Photo Contest/Giveaway! Sep 21 KTSullivan 2
Taurus Gaucho Revolver (May '06) Sep 16 Senb12 29
News Lawyer: 'Pharma Bro' joking about bounty for Cl... Sep 13 Jeff Brightone 2
News Ryan Blocking Concealed Carry Reciprocity, Cong... Sep 11 FormerParatrooper 1
News D.C. Requests Hearing on Protection of Second A... Sep 10 Lou Posey 3
News SCOTUS Asked to Review Ninth Circuit Decision o... Sep 9 FormerParatrooper 2
More from around the web