Protect our Homeland with a 50 caliber
Now is the time for all citizens to help out homeland security by aquiring one of these weapons to help protect our freedoms.
The .50 Caliber Sniper Rifle can be bought in most of USA by just about any sane person. I don't know if Wallmart has them, but look around.
These powerful sniper rifles were designed for the battlefield to puncture armor and destroy targets from long range and are now as easy to get as a handgun.
Why should we be spending billions of dollars on homeland security when anyone can buy a sniper rifle that can shoot armor piercing bullets up to a mile away. Hey, have no fear about terrorist getting these hot items because you first have to have a background check to prove that you are sane. We know that terrorist could never do that so they could never get a dangerous weapon like this.
Why do we permit the sale of a weapon that is powerful enough to threaten civilian airplanes, tanker cars full of explosives or toxins, Why? so the average citizen can help protect our homeland in case we have a UFO, a submarine full of terrorists, or a factory herd of pissed off robots invading our country. If everyone had one of these, think how safe Amercia would be. Granada, Cuba and Iraq would never again consider attacking us. And don't forget you could shoot a burglar or a rapist from over a mile away, way before he is a threat to anyone in the home.
.50 Caliber sniper rifles are a terrorist’s dream considering the death and destruction they could inflict but they are also your dream, I just about have an organism when I think of the power in this menancing piece. Think man, you will no longer be a girlie boy when you show up on the shooting range with one of these babies.
Go to http://www.vpc.org/50caliber.htm for more facts on these rifles
- .50 Caliber Sniper Rifles were designed to attack parked or landing aircraft, armored personnel carriers, rail tank cars, bulk fuel storage, and concrete bunkers. I'm not sure if this is legal?
- .50 Caliber sniper rifles are powerful enough to puncture armored limousines and can be used as tools for assassination. I don't know if this is legal reason to have one so check it out first.
- .50 Caliber Sniper Rifles have effective ranges up to 2,000 yards, or in other words, 20 football fields laid end to end plus 50 Caliber ammunition armor-piercing, incendiary, and explosive rounds are readily available. Just in case that deer wanders behind a rocky crevis, you could still get him from a mile away. Talk about impressing your hunting buddies.
Get one NOW, and thank the NRA, it's lobbyist and the Reublicans for defending your rights to aquire them.
- Login or register to post comments
- Send to friend
Join us & contribute
Proud members of the Democratic Party
Copyright 2006 Democrats.com. All rights reserved. Privacy Policy
Ok, now this is troublesome
No, Homeland Security - we are not advocating that citizens buy sniper rifles to shoot down aircraft. We wouldn't do that here.
I believe the idea is that if you're going to allow us to buy them for 'hunting' that we should take you up on your offer. We would never hurt anyone!
They paved paradise and put up a parking lot.
Kinetic weapons are for Right
Kinetic weapons are for Right Wingers. Progressives hunt wabbits with LASERS!
This is nuts!
Could you imagine if we all had
these rifles? No thanks.
BTW- The day when all animals are equally
equipped with weapons to kill us is the day
"hunting" becomes a sport.
The Second Amendment guarante
The Second Amendment guarantees the right to arm bears!
LOL. How long did you wait fo
LOL. How long did you wait for someone to set you up for that line?
Wait one must, for things whi
Wait one must, for things which are good...
-Yoda
I walk right into
this, time and time,again.
( sigh)
;-) What bears do in the wood
;-) What bears do in the woods is far more noble than what the BA has done to Amurica.
Absolutely, and don't forget
it fertilizes the good earth,too.
;-)
I know, Bill. Our Bill of Rights,
states it loud and clear.
Still, the thought of some people
with high powered rifles is very unsettling.
Not to mention the pissed off robots!
I wisn I had given Bill that
I wisn I had given Bill that set up.
On the lighter side, if I was
On the lighter side, if I was ever burglarized, I'd love to see the look on the guy's face when I pulled one of these 50-caliber babies on him! Kind of like having a lion as a guard dog.
I'd never load it, honest!
2nd Amendment
Its true that the second amendment allows us to own weapons such as the .50 caliber rifle... but their is a reason they are called amendments.
Actually, the Second Amendmen
Actually, the Second Amendment does NOT give ALL citizens the right to own weapons. Each State regulates who may own guns, and under what conditions they can keep, use, and carry them. Gun use is like driving a car -- it's a privilege, and not an absolute right.
People who assume that they have a "right" to arm themselves seldom read the second half of the sentence that refers to an "organized militia."
You commies will have to pry
You commies will have to pry my rocket launcher from my cold dead hands.
Huzzah!
Remember -- when the Rapture
Remember -- when the Rapture comes, we get all their guns too.
All I need for my self protec
All I need for my self protection is my trusty ol' bazooka, or "Bessie" as I like to call her. I keep Bessie under my pillow at night. Makes me feel all safe and snuggly inside.
Golfmonkey, be careful.
Bessie sounds like she's temperamental.
You don't want any rude awakenings.
;-)
Bill, you've got your facts w
Bill, you've got your facts wrong although on overall substance you're not far off.
1) The amendment doesn't use the word "organized. What it does say is "well regulated" which does not refer to regulations but to function and discipline. If you've ever owned a windup clock (grandfather, etc.) you know you have to routinely regulate it to keep good time. To be well regulated means to function properly.
2) "Militia" refers not to state militias, such as the National Guard, but to the population as a whole. A militia was simply a group of people loosely organized to fight and defend together.
Read the Federalist Papers and other contemporary works tregarding the debates on the Constitution and its amendments. The second half of the amendment only gives the reason ("being necessary", etc.) why the people have the right to keep and bear arms, it doesn't modify the right itself.
I do believe states have leeway in making laws regarding gun onwership and the right to carry arm but may only exclude someone under limited circumstances. It could not be argued, for example, that convicted criminals in any way represent well regulated or a militia.
The proof is in the history. After passing the Constitution, there was no roundup of personal weapons.
Sorry about the use of the wo
Sorry about the use of the word "organized" vs. "regulated." Memory isn't what it used to be. However, the *purpose* of the reference to a militia is up for grabs. It has been the source of arguments by both sides of the issue for generations, and is one of the so-called "reasons" for the formation of the NRA.
I choose to believe that a "regulated militia" is exactly what we have with the States' National Guard units, and satisfies the Second Amendment. I can see no rational, or foreseeable, event that would require the citizenry at large to take up arms against either the US government, or a foreign invader.
"The right to bear arms" is one of those non-issues that the RR and their ilk like to trot out from time-to-time to stir the pot. My own personal take is that gun ownership by an RR nutcake is an infringement of MY right to the pursuit of happiness.
Didn't mean to start up a non-issue argument.
P.S. After the Constitution was passed, there was no round up of slave owners either. Doesn't make it right, or prove slavery was a good thing.
Apples and oranges: Unfortun
Apples and oranges: Unfortunately, although some involved with the drafting did try, the Constitution did not outlaw slavery, therefore no roundup of slave owners would even have been expected. My point was, if the amendment was simply talking about state (government) militias and not individula citizens, the federal government would have seized weapons not in the hands of the militias. I'm not putting a value judgement on what did or didn't happen.
Modern day militias are definitely fringe, barricading themselves against imagined enemies. I also can't imagine any circumstance when a large group would have to rise up against the government. But imagine what might have happened if "Jim Crow" remained the law of the land. It wouldn't have just been riots in some cities, it would have been a more widespread rebellion, certainly for the worse.
By the way, I don't own a gun. The first and only time I saw a bullet in someone's hand, it sickened me to think something so small could end a life.
Bic lighters are banned
It does not make a lot of sense to ban bic lighters (as of today)on planes yet allow anyone to own a 50 caliber. The lighter lobby needs a second amendment.
Some people LOVE guns. I sur
Some people LOVE guns. I sure want one if a monster is about to kill my family.
It might be true that more guns equal more unnecessary deaths in a nation. I believe that is proven, but I realize if you LOVE guns it will be a difficult idea to allow into one's world view because it makes the political act of protecting unlimited weaponry far more difficult. Still an intelligent person should be able to wrap his brain around the concept.
What I want to see is gun owners taking responsibility for their selfishness. I am not trying to debate gun ownership. I would just love to hear someone say I own a gun, it makes me safer, but I know it is a selfish act. It need not always be a selfish act but often is. Criminals get their guns by stealing them from houses, rotten gun dealers, etc. Gun owners feed that market.
Can the above argument be extended to include a vast array of activities? YES. I’m not picking on gun owners.
Question for gun lovers.
Why? Maybe I will understand better if someone rational (the NRA doesn't sound rational) explains this to me. After all, despite the claim guns don't kill people, people kill people, guns serve no primary purpose but to kill. Nuclear weopons exist now to deter (so they say) but they were invented to kill.
Please explain how you can love this!!
Vince, this question was
set to music over 30 years
ago, by the southern rock band,
Lynyrd Skynard
Saturday Night Special
(Ed King - Ronnie VanZant)
Two feets they come a creepin'
Like a black cat do
And two bodies are lyin' naked
Creeper think he got nothin' to lose
So he creeps into this house, yeah
And unlocks the door
And while a man reaching for his trousers
Shoots him full of .38 holes
(Chorus)
Its a Saturday night special
Got a barrel that's blue and cold
Ain't no good for nothin'
But put a man six feet in a hole
Big Jim's been drinkin' whiskey
And playing poker on a losin' night
Pretty soon, Big Jim starts a thinkin'
Somebody been cheatin' and lyin'
So Big Jim commences to fightin'
I wouldn't tell you no lie
And Big Jim done grab his pistol
Shot his friend right between the eyes
(Chorus)
Hand guns are made for killin'
Ain't no good for nothin' else
And if you like your whiskey
You might even shoot yourself
So why don't we dump 'em people
To the bottom of the sea
Before some fool come around here
Wanna shoot either you or me
Copyright by Duchess Music/Hustlers Inc - BMI
All rights reserved. Used by permission.