So... handgrenades are WMD's?

Discussion in 'In the News' started by foshizzle, Dec 8, 2006.

  1. foshizzle

    foshizzle New Member

    1,283
    0
    0
    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16110298/

    Nonsense. So I guess there are probably a few MILLION WMD's in Iraq right now and US troops have a good portion of them!
     
  2. Gunstar1

    Gunstar1 Administrator

    8,460
    5
    38
    Well, 3 years ago in Washington the Dems tried to classify guns as WMDs.
    http://www.newsmax.com/archives/article ... 4624.shtml

    :roll:
     

  3. Macktee

    Macktee New Member

    6,172
    0
    0

    Sounds like 10 year old Buicks plowing thru farmers' markets would also qualify...

    Just when you think you've seen politicians at their most stupid, they go and up the ante on us!

    Well, maybe it's not the fault of the politicians. Some of them can't help being stupid. Ergo (therefore)(that was for MP!), the fault lies with the other stupids...ya know...da peoples who vote those stupids into office...

    US!!!
     
  4. Foul

    Foul New Member

    780
    0
    0
    With the Dems and Repubs, a well timed beer fart could be classified as a WMD.
    It's all about control.
     
  5. viper32cm

    viper32cm New Member

    760
    0
    0
    I think that makes people weapons of mass destruction. Two hands, two knives or throats... you get the picture.
     
  6. gunsmoker

    gunsmoker Lawyer and Gun Activist

    24,117
    70
    48
    Should we Have 'Em?

    Well are they, or not?
    Does it matter? Does the Second Amendment say, "The right of the people to keep and bear arms, other than WMD's, shall not be infringed?"
    If hand grenades are commonly issued to infantry troops, and all military personnel must learn to use them in basic training, should they be considered the kind of militia weapon that the Second Amendment was intended to allow citizens to possess?

    Do hand grenades have a huge potential for harm in the wrong hands? Yep. You betcha. Do they have a huge potential for good guys to use to ward off an attack by bad guys? Certainly. Would they make helpful tools to use in many self-defense scenarios involving multiple opponents, without innocent non-combatants near the action? Sure. Do criminal street gangs and outlaw motorcycle gangs often attack en masse? In fact they do. Would a grenade tossed among them do a lot of good in convincing them, collectively, to leave you alone? I would think so.

    Yet I don't want to see hand grenades sold in the sporting goods section of Wal-Mart the way shotguns are. Am I a traiter to the cause?
    A bedwetting liberal? A jack-booted thug?
     
  7. viper32cm

    viper32cm New Member

    760
    0
    0
    Hmm, grenades...

    Well, under an original intent reading of the second amendment "every terrible implement of the soldier" and all the jazz we now step into the "slippery slope" argument that some liberals like to use against us.

    "Well if yout think the second amendment gives you the right to own military weaponry then I guess that means you think individuals can own nuclear weapons"

    If you say no, then you've validated that there are limits and that there slippery slope is just as good as your own.

    If you say yes, then you are dismissed as a wack job.

    My answer is yes. (A lot of people already think I'm a wack job, so its cool)

    The reasoning is economics. Why in the hell would a private ciitzen go to such great expense to build or buy a nuke. First off, it woudl be so expensive that it would be pretty clear who could buy one and second of all why would a private citizen buy a weapon that he could never really use and if he did he could only use once and never be able to buy one again (again the expense angle). The answer is of course that even if they were legal no private citizen would buy one, and if some private citizen was crazy enough to buy one and had the desire to use it either a) the laws wouldn't matter to him anyway as is the case with most arms control measures or b) it'd be pretty easy to figure out who he was.

    The problem comes with smaller destructive devices which can cause mass damage against personnel and material but are relatively cheap to produce. Grenades for example are such an item. However, in my eyes one can already make grenades right now. A thin metal casing enclosing an explosive and a timed fuse, viola, a grenade. All three of which are pretty easy to find. Pipe bombs anybody?

    But that's just my $0.02 on the subject. Disussing when nukes and grenades are going to be legal is pretty much like discussing when I'm going to marry the next Miss America, it ain't going to happen.