No Profanity *** No Flaming *** No Advertising *** No Anti Trappers ***NO POLITICS
No Non-Target Catches *** No Links to Anti-trapping Sites *** No Avoiding Profanity Filter
Never in the military, but I'm aware of what an M60 is. They can currently be legally owned already, as long as the serialized part was made before 1986. The serial number is on either the trunnion or the bottom channel. The trunnion-serialized guns are worth more than the bottom-channel-serialized guns because the bottom channel is just a stamped part, and is more likely to wear out. everything but the serialized part can be replaced. So, if your bottom channel-serialized m-60 wears out, bends, etc it bottom channel, the whole gun is junk, only useful to sell for parts. You cant replace it unless you get another pre-1986 bottom channel. (That's probably more info than you wanted.) Those rules are ridiculous. Yes, anyone should be allowed to own one. It's an "arm", as stated in the constitution. The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.
So, you feel anyone who wanted one should be allowed to own one? No background check at all because that's against the constitution. I don't doubt that for you to own wouldn't be an issue and the general public would be safe. It would probably be that way for most people. But, turn one loose on a MS-13 member or any other crazy, the damage that they could do would be devastating. I have experience because I fired an M-60 many times while in the military. I watched two soldiers set at angles to each other completely reduce to rubble a 20X20 wooden building in a minute's time. In the wrong hands, a massacre would be immense putting a M60 in the wrong hands. Background checks would be a must at the least.
The difference between animals and humans is that animals would never let the dumbest ones lead the pack.
Re: Time to turn em in, boys
[Re: Trapper7]
#6390062 12/04/1805:14 PM12/04/1805:14 PM
Never in the military, but I'm aware of what an M60 is. They can currently be legally owned already, as long as the serialized part was made before 1986. The serial number is on either the trunnion or the bottom channel. The trunnion-serialized guns are worth more than the bottom-channel-serialized guns because the bottom channel is just a stamped part, and is more likely to wear out. everything but the serialized part can be replaced. So, if your bottom channel-serialized m-60 wears out, bends, etc it bottom channel, the whole gun is junk, only useful to sell for parts. You cant replace it unless you get another pre-1986 bottom channel. (That's probably more info than you wanted.) Those rules are ridiculous. Yes, anyone should be allowed to own one. It's an "arm", as stated in the constitution. The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.
So, you feel anyone who wanted one should be allowed to own one? No background check at all because that's against the constitution. I don't doubt that for you to own wouldn't be an issue and the general public would be safe. It would probably be that way for most people. But, turn one loose on a MS-13 member or any other crazy, the damage that they could do would be devastating. I have experience because I fired an M-60 many times while in the military. I watched two soldiers set at angles to each other completely reduce to rubble a 20X20 wooden building in a minute's time. In the wrong hands, a massacre would be immense putting a M60 in the wrong hands. Background checks would be a must at the least.
You seem to assume that everyone else would be unarmed.
Mike
One man with a gun may control 100 others who have none.
you also assume ms13 doesn't already own m-60's. probably own 50 cals. all kinds of u.s. military arms in the hands of evil doers worldwide. fear is the number one reason people give up liberty. in 1968 it was fear of armed black men. in 2018 its fear of illegal alien organized crime. in the early 90's it was fear of released from custody convicts. here's a funny fact. none of the gun control laws honest people abide by affect outlaws even a tiny bit.
Those who would give up essential liberty, to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety. Benjamin Franklin (1706-1790)
End the drug war and MS13 members would be back to manning tamale carts in Tijuana.
So you think that if all drugs were made legal the recreational and/or addiction markets would simply vanish? You think MS13 and all the various drug cartels would quit selling drugs just because they suddenly became legal?
I don't.
I think the demand for heroin, fentanyl, coke, crack, weed and every other kind of mood-altering drug would remain high, the market would continue to be driven by addicts and recreational users. And there would continue to be huge profits to be made. And those currently controlling the drug flow would continue to do so. And they would continue to brutalize and kill rivals, rip-offs and anybody else that got in the way of profits.
Maybe lugnut. but the gang wars of the ethanol peddlers stopped when it was made legal again. still plenty of addicts around but ive never seen a news story where anybody was murdered over ethanol distribution competition.
Those who would give up essential liberty, to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety. Benjamin Franklin (1706-1790)
since we are on the subject what are any positives to come out of the war on drugs? any drug anybody wants is readily available even in rural America. plenty of addicts around. so far as I can tell anybody who wants to try a little heroin or meth has done so. serious question. list some positives. for the life of me I cant see any where the war on drugs is concerned.
Those who would give up essential liberty, to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety. Benjamin Franklin (1706-1790)
The mob didn't quit when alcohol was returned to legality, I don't reckon MS13 would quit if drugs were made legal.
No, they still had drugs, gambling, and prostitution... Which makes me wonder if the mafia is actually the biggest reason all those other vices have remained illegal.
Mike
One man with a gun may control 100 others who have none.
Danny, of course there are positives. The government makes money of prohibition, the lawyers make money, anyone involved in the prison system, banks laundering money and the list goes on.
"Inflation is always and everywhere a monetary phenomenon". Milton Friedman.
you also assume ms13 doesn't already own m-60's. probably own 50 cals. all kinds of u.s. military arms in the hands of evil doers worldwide. fear is the number one reason people give up liberty. in 1968 it was fear of armed black men. in 2018 its fear of illegal alien organized crime. in the early 90's it was fear of released from custody convicts. here's a funny fact. none of the gun control laws honest people abide by affect outlaws even a tiny bit.
This started out about making bump stocks illegal. There is a huge difference between an M60 and bump stocks. Bump stocks are like shooting a single shot compared to an M60. To say anyone who wants one should be allowed to have one is just plain crazy.
I was in the military in the late sixties. We had the M60 back then. It's such an effective weapon with awesome firepower, the military still uses them. A lot of other weapons have been replaced by better options.
The thinking along the lines of anyone should be allowed to own such a dangerous weapon guarantees there will always only be two parties as serious contenders for president because both parties will never agree to allow just anyone to own dangerous weapons like the M60.
The difference between animals and humans is that animals would never let the dumbest ones lead the pack.
