Nobody NEEDS a semi-auto assault weapon

Everybody NEEDS a full-auto one

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

LifeStraw Water Filter for Hiking and Preparedness

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

  1. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    >FA Glock
    >gay lock
    ha

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Glock fans on suicide watch

  2. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Only people who want full auto are people who don't own guns, or are shooting ammo that someone else is paying for.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Giga cope

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Full auto for individuals is a meme and there is not a single gun on there I want or would trade any of my current guns for. If I had to pick between suppressors and sbrs or mgs taken off the nfa I'd pick the former without hesitation.

      Frick you Black person I need a state-mandate FA M2 .50 cal NOW

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      So long as it has a switch I'll take a full auto.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        is that a moustache or the man's mouth

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Full auto for individuals is a meme and there is not a single gun on there I want or would trade any of my current guns for. If I had to pick between suppressors and sbrs or mgs taken off the nfa I'd pick the former without hesitation.

      it should still be legal

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      This
      >remember multi mag dumping a p90
      >lulz to be had
      >no lulz to be had when I realize I effectively just burned away hours of work for a few seconds of lulz
      Something to experience but sure as hell isn't something I want to do on a regular basis.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        >Something to experience but sure as hell isn't something I want to do on a regular basis.
        Yes, everyone should absolutely give it a try once if some range has one to rent or a bro has one. It's fun to experience. But then that's it. There's no skill or self-improvement to do and unless you're megarich god damn did you just evaporate a lot of money making some noise and that's it.

        I mean, shit, if it wasn't illegal and you could have select fire then sure I guess there wouldn't be any particular reason not to have it on there, probably everything would be default because it's not like it's technically complicated. But would also be the sort of thing maybe you'd flick to full auto once or twice in a gun's life. People make a bigger deal of it then it deserves but I guess that's the allure of forbidden fruit, also video games.

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          >no skill or self improvement to be had
          I practice bumpfiring from the hip/point shooting. It's fun as shit when you get a little good.
          Would be a lot cooler if I could just have full giggle to piss away Aluminum cased 9 more reliably.
          Idk why the 5.45 and x39 boomers didnt 3rd pin their AKs when that shit was .22lr cheap, no reason not to homebrew some cans and hit the national forest at those rates.

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          >I mean, shit, if it wasn't illegal and you could have select fire then sure I guess there wouldn't be any particular reason not to have it on there, probably everything would be default because it's not like it's technically complicated.

          THAT'S THE POINT YOU DAFT Black person. ALMOST EVERY SINGLE SEMI-AUTOMATIC GUN WOULD BE FULLY AUTOMATIC IF IT WEREN'T FOR THE LAW.

          FRICK YOU. FRICK YOU. FRICK YOU. FRICK YOU. FRICK YOU. FRICK YOU. FRICK YOU.

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            It being legal doesn't magically make it affordable, tard-kun.

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              Of course it would, why wouldn't it? You think gun companies wouldn't immediately start selling full autos to us? I guarantee you that they would.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Full auto switches yea, but not ammo.

                The best part of a Hughes/NFA repeal would be .22LR burp guns like the American 180 imo. Everything else is too expensive.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                nice try satan.

                If you're not sitting on at least 2k per rifle owned and 1k per pistol then i'm sorry but NGMI. I personally have like 12k and i could always use a resupply.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >Full auto switches yea, but not ammo.

                That doesn't matter. There is no reason not to have select fire. Just because you have full auto doesn't mean you always have to use it. The point is that manufacturing fully automatic weapons costs the same amount of money as semi autos. The price differences would be negligible.

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            >schizo making the argument for why it should be illegal
            many such cases

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            Shut the frick up you bootlicking homosexual. If it were the choice between semi auto only or full auto only, there's only one choice that doesn't make you a complete wiener huffing waste of skin

            >t. future school shooters

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            >tfw no full-auto snub-nose revolver

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              >snub-nose revolver
              >semi-auto

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Checked and it exists
                I want this in FA in 5.7mm with an auto-ejector please

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            >FA 1911
            Oh G_d

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              >FA 1911
              SHALL

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      >Only people who want full auto are people who don't own guns, or are shooting ammo that someone else is paying for.

      What a homosexual you. Do you want a car that tops out at 65mph too? Everyone should have the option at a minimum.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        >Do you want a car that tops out at 65mph too?
        Not even remotely comparable since the cost of driving over 65MPH doesn't vastly increase your cost of driving you moron.
        >t. someone who regularly exceeds 65MPH, and wouldn't bother with a vehicle capable of doing so if it increased my cost of driving like full auto would increase my cost of shooting

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          Anon, mechanical wear on automobiles increases exponentially with speed...

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            >you're subjecting your vehicle to exponentially more wear by going 75 mph instead of 65 mph
            Do morons here actually believe this? Do you even know that "exponential" means?

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              would like me an rpd. want something belt fed and 249s fricking suck.

              >higher revs cause more wear
              this is a true statement especially since most smaller engine produce power by revving faster.
              >durr im a gay fricking moron who doesnt understand how 10mph can make a difference.
              yeah depending on the vehicle gearing that can be a thousand rpm difference. go lurk a billion year on PrepHole before you talk about cars maybe.

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          Anon you are literally moronic

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Or they're people who don't live in the fantasy world of one shot cns scoring drops.
      Maybe you need a lecture on probability.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        Point to a single case, ever, where some civilian in a defense shooting failed because of how fast they could pull the trigger with semi-auto. By your moron logic why aren't select fire binary triggers the standard? Completely legal and let you shoot bullets faster!

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          haha boolet gun go brrrrrr

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Full auto for individuals is a meme and there is not a single gun on there I want or would trade any of my current guns for. If I had to pick between suppressors and sbrs or mgs taken off the nfa I'd pick the former without hesitation.

      Only homosexual pretenders don't want a full auto MG. Bro I'm trying to get rich just so I can spend 80-100k for a an auto m60 because freedom. I'm still broke, but...

      WHO'S WITH ME?! SHOW ME YOUR WAR FACE

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        I'm sure that most people here would love owning a bunch of MGs, Anon, it's just that, in the grand scheme of things, being able to occasionally giggle dump a mag is far less important than the deregulation of silencers or SBR/SBS'.

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          I unironically wouldn't, at least not before a ton of other pricey stuff I don't own. Sure if given theoretical 8 figure net worth I'd get there eventually, but I'd be buying funs like $40k quadnods and too end thermals and that ludicrous semiauto bullpup 50cal before an MG. Not that it wouldn't be cool if the NFA got reformed or taken down but as a practical level my real excitement would be over all the possible innovation in integral suppression and designs of all kinds that had zero need to worry about barrels/oals anymore etc.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Poorgay alert

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      You do know that most FAs have a selector switch, right? Not a soul is forcing you to shoot in full auto only, even then, you can control the cyclic rate.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      If you had a full auto all your money should go to it. You don’t need any hobbies or interests outside of guns anyway

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Why are you on an enthusiast board? Guys spend thousands of dollars to make their shitbox do 2 seconds better in the quarter mile. Practical is a buzzword. And depending on cal it isn't even true. before the 'Rona, between loading, putting up targets and letting the barrel cool you're spending maybe 1000 bucks an hour. A Drum of 100 octane is 800 dollars before shipping and we'll burn 2 drums on track day easy.

      would like me an rpd. want something belt fed and 249s fricking suck.

      >higher revs cause more wear
      this is a true statement especially since most smaller engine produce power by revving faster.
      >durr im a gay fricking moron who doesnt understand how 10mph can make a difference.
      yeah depending on the vehicle gearing that can be a thousand rpm difference. go lurk a billion year on PrepHole before you talk about cars maybe.

      revs cause more wear
      Yes but nah, your Kia Sorento isn't losing any substantial engine life at throttle. Especially since you're not doing it for long and most cars are electronically limited so when you hit limited, your transmission goes to OD and you're only revving around 4k. Starting your engine puts more wear on it than an hour at throttle. Even at throttle your average motor is well within it's limits, and your main issue is gonna be getting impounded. *some cars where not built well, like early 2000s dodge which had weak con rods and liked to launch pistons out the top, and stock honda Ds with poor oiling and mechanical rev limiters that floated over time

      t. build motors for a living

      PrepHole is a bunch of bus riders, there's literally 0 people there who build or tune. You'll have better luck on shitty forums.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        >Why are you on an enthusiast board?
        Why do you think being an enthusiast means pissing away money on spraying ammo into a berm vs buying a dozen other super awesome things? I mean, you certainly CAN pick that has how you spend your funz budget, I just don't like the idea that it's the only right way.

  3. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Full auto for individuals is a meme and there is not a single gun on there I want or would trade any of my current guns for. If I had to pick between suppressors and sbrs or mgs taken off the nfa I'd pick the former without hesitation.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      >he wouldnt trade his shittiest, cheapest gun for a full auto M249 SAW
      This is your brain on contrarianism

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        >owning any shitty, cheap guns
        >instantly assuming everyone else owns shitty, cheap guns
        Is this a ghetto dweller thing? Is that picture of your nig idol?

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        >burns through at least $4.80 in ammo every second at current ammo prices, which are unlikely to go down
        >most ranges don't allow full auto due to the rate that it wears out their berms
        >.50 BMG can be had for $2.89/round with free shipping right now
        I would honestly rather have an anti material rifle to frick around with if I was to get something with that high of ammo costs and limited choices for the ranges I could actually shoot it at.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Shut the frick up you bootlicking homosexual. If it were the choice between semi auto only or full auto only, there's only one choice that doesn't make you a complete wiener huffing waste of skin

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        >t. noguns who gets their idea of how guns work from video games

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous
          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            Does daddy know that you're playing with his guns without permission?

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              >the usual nogunz response
              I rest my case

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              Post guns or stfu

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            is that a famas?

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          rekt.

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          [...]
          >t. future school shooters

          homosexual posters

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous
    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      I agree with the 2nd half of this post.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        I was assuming here we're imagining a world in which mgs had no special pricing and I was actually considering any of OP's guns as permanent replacements. If we're talking purely in terms of getting something to then sell then sure, even my nicest $6-7k setup is worth less then a transferable working MG so obviously trading it for something worth $40k then selling it and buying a new one of the same setup would just be "would you like a free $34k" to which the answer is yes.

        As far as the second half I have hopes that getting suppressors at least off the NFA isn't impossible. The number of legal states has slowly expanded even in very blue ones, and is now 42/50. Federal gov takes forever to change even for obvious shit but once a super majority of the country is one way conditions are ripe. More reform would be better but I'd take some.

        I know some people have hopes scotus will strike down the entire thing but I really doubt it.

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          gonna sound cucked but while I don't like the idea of paying a $200 tax stamp I wouldn't actually mind paying $200. I guess it's just because I live in CA, and can't get one anyway. I'd love to just be able to pay $200 and call it a day. Well, call it 9 months.

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            >gonna sound cucked but while I don't like the idea of paying a $200 tax stamp I wouldn't actually mind paying $200. I guess it's just because I live in CA, and can't get one anyway. I'd love to just be able to pay $200 and call it a day. Well, call it 9 months.
            The last sentence there is in some ways the biggest true problem and an even more minimal ask but that should absolutely be passable. There is nothing in the law that says it needs to take months. Even leaving everything else 100% identical, if a reform passed mandating that stamps could take no longer then a week and would be approved by default following a bog standard instant background check that'd be a huge deal to the market.

            Personally I don't think keeping the $200 matters much because it effectively drops in value every single year due to inflation. When the law was passed that was worth like $4500 in today's money, it was meant to be a loophole exclusively for the rich. At present high rates the value has dropped a lot just in the last few years ($200 in Jan 2020 would be $232 today, $200 in Jan 2003 would be $330, effective cost has dropped by more than half). Obviously it'd be better if it was nothing and as a Constitutional matter our basic rights should never be taxed, poll taxes were ruled illegal long ago and firearm taxes should be too. But as a matter of politics it's basically dying purely by ignoring it regardless so that's not the hill I'd die on. If keeping the $200 while getting the times down or getting suppressors off made a bill palatable to Joe Manchin or one of the other few centrist democrats and that's what it took to get something through I'd take the deal.

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              >Personally I don't think keeping the $200 matters much because it effectively drops in value every single year due to inflation.
              Yes, I agree. Well, only as long as the average wage keeps pace with inflation, which it isn't, but the $200 is still dropping in value anyway.

              I don't see why I can get my background check for a gun in 10 days but a silencer takes a year for some people. If they're worried about criminals or something, well, a criminal with a gun is more dangerous than a guy with a metal tube with baffles in it.

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            >gonna sound cucked but while I don't like the idea of paying a $200 tax stamp I wouldn't actually mind paying $200. I guess it's just because I live in CA, and can't get one anyway. I'd love to just be able to pay $200 and call it a day. Well, call it 9 months.
            The last sentence there is in some ways the biggest true problem and an even more minimal ask but that should absolutely be passable. There is nothing in the law that says it needs to take months. Even leaving everything else 100% identical, if a reform passed mandating that stamps could take no longer then a week and would be approved by default following a bog standard instant background check that'd be a huge deal to the market.

            Personally I don't think keeping the $200 matters much because it effectively drops in value every single year due to inflation. When the law was passed that was worth like $4500 in today's money, it was meant to be a loophole exclusively for the rich. At present high rates the value has dropped a lot just in the last few years ($200 in Jan 2020 would be $232 today, $200 in Jan 2003 would be $330, effective cost has dropped by more than half). Obviously it'd be better if it was nothing and as a Constitutional matter our basic rights should never be taxed, poll taxes were ruled illegal long ago and firearm taxes should be too. But as a matter of politics it's basically dying purely by ignoring it regardless so that's not the hill I'd die on. If keeping the $200 while getting the times down or getting suppressors off made a bill palatable to Joe Manchin or one of the other few centrist democrats and that's what it took to get something through I'd take the deal.

            As a Bong who loves to shoot the whole silencer thing in the US is just moronic. You can walk into Walmart and buy a firearm with no issues, but a silencer costs $200 to just apply for and takes months to receive.
            While laws are strict in the UK, if you apply for a firearms license the police practically expect you to get a silencer and its part of the same ticket.

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              yeah, it's pretty moronic, if we still had a polite society silencers would practically be a given for every firearm

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              Bongs have zero room to talk to us about weirdo old laws dating back a long time anon. You know how it is to have history linger on. Or new ones for that matter, like holy shit dude your fricking country is about to ban encrypted chat.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                No it isn't, some moron politician will talk about it but it never happens.
                We have some old weird laws on the books but they are rarely enforced.
                I can think of more weird ones in the US like 'open container laws' or paying tax on prize money, or tipping everyone.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >No it isn't, some moron politician will talk about it but it never happens.
                Anon every real serious company and encryption developer I've seen says your new "Online Safety Bill" is absolutely serious and moving along through your political process in a real way:
                >https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34936127
                >https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-64584001
                You've gotten praised by Xi for how much surveillance you've got in London, online, and how aggressive you are at taking weapons. I'm American so it's not directly my battle but holy shit dude you should be paying attention to some of what's getting passed. The Aussies already did one too.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                There have been loads of bills like that, they never make it though parliament. It's no different to someone proposing a gun ban in the US and 'working it though the senate' until it ultimately gets dropped

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >I can think of more weird ones in the US like 'open container laws' or paying tax on prize money, or tipping everyone.
                >tipping everyone
                >law
                Anon, I...

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >or paying tax on prize money
                Why would this be treated differently then any other ordinary income?
                >or tipping everyone.
                That's just a norm. The only law involved is that if someone doesn't get enough in tips to meet minimum wage, their employer is required by law to pay the difference. Tips can theoretically let someone make more than minimum wage but tips cannot be used to avoid minimum wage. But there is no law, merely social. If tips are expected and you don't tip and ever go back there again you'll probably get shitty service.

                America is a big place though. Some areas have lots of tipping, some have none. It's plenty controversial, some love it some hate it.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Tipping can be quite beneficial if done correctly. For example, every year around Christmas I make sure to scrape up at least $100 for the guys who pick up my trash, and as a result they will cheerfully go out of their way to take care of anything I need. On the other hand the restaurant I used to stop by for breakfast hired a lazy piece of shit waiter, and I made him quit by giving him a quarter and telling him that it was exactly what I thought his service was worth.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >>or paying tax on prize money
                Why would this be treated differently then any other ordinary income?
                Prize money is tax free in most of Europe.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >Prize money is tax free in most of Europe.
                And THAT is weird. Why would getting a bunch of money you did zero work for be taxed less then money you did work for?

                There have been loads of bills like that, they never make it though parliament. It's no different to someone proposing a gun ban in the US and 'working it though the senate' until it ultimately gets dropped

                >It's no different to someone proposing a gun ban in the US
                It's very different. You don't have an Constitution. No one seriously proposes flat out "gun bans" in the US because they'd be struck down. Controllers have to try to find other ways to interfere like magazine capacity limits or something, but guns aren't going anywhere thanks to the 2A. Nor is encryption going anywhere thanks to the 1A and software being free speech.

                Whereas Britain already has one of the strongest surveillance states in the world, most restrictive weapons laws, etc. They are the original nanny state, there's a reason that's where 1984 was set. You've got an unusually fricked up desperate government right now having just gone through incredible numbers of PMs, tories are miles behind in the polls and terrified of the next election and thus pushing culture war red meat hard. They need some time in the cold but they don't want to. It's certainly not all hopeless but it's also completely believable that THINK OF THE CHILDREN ONLY COPS JUST TRYING TO CATCH PEDOS will work yet again.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Prize money is pre-taxed.
                The US is odd in taxing after but that's done to draw in more suckers by advertising higher pots.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                No the US is right. Rich people occasionally win prizes too. Taxes vary right down the county/city/town level. There is no reason not to just treat it as income identically to anything else. There is lots of bullshit in the US tax system but that's a weird one to fixate on. A real one would be how Intuit has managed to lobby to prevent the IRS from doing our taxes combined with remaining 1980s Republicans who want Americans to suffer.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >Prize money is tax free in most of Europe.
                I don’t believe that but good for you guys if that’s true. I just don’t see them not taxing income

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      >I would rather have a short rifle than an M2.

      Fricking why?

      I will admit, I do not necessarily want my neighbors having HMGs because it seems like that would take safety issues up to the next level given plunging fire can reach out way, way past line of sight in most cases, but I fricking want one. And a quad 14.5mm set up (see how police helicopters like them apples).

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        >Fricking why?
        Because I'm not into completely worthless sculpture I might use once in my life. Actually scratch that it's not "worthless" it's literally negative worth. 50bmg is like $2-3/rnd minimum, even the slow variant does like 450rnds a minute and the fast 1200. So go out and blaze away for a few 30 second bursts and whee, you just sprayed an entire nice gun or optic or thermal or NVG out the end of the barrel for fricking what? Or major home improvements, or a ton of other stuff. And "quad 14.5"!? Like 10x that money.
        >huur imma gunna FITE DA POWEECE
        No you aren't you nignog fricking zoomie larper. Whereas I actually like to use my stuff for real. I don't live in some urban shit hole and I know my town police (total town population: ~487), my neighbors etc. I go shooting with them.

        If an M2 was your heart's desire sure by all means, it's your money. But it shouldn't be a mystery to you why a lot of us wouldn't give a shit and actively don't want it it vs other stuff. If I was going to drop 5 figures on some crazy stupid 50bmg rifle I'd prefer pic related, or for something "more realistic" an HTI completely tricked out.

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          Yeah

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            frick ya mudda

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              Meds

  4. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    i think the only full auto i'd be all that interested in is something chambered in .22lr for meme/dollar ratios, i don't have the logistics required to feed a crew served weapon in a hypothetical SHTF whatever scenario and i don't make enough money for turning dollars into noise to be fun for hours, so unless it's a home defense MP5 i'm not really interested

  5. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    >M249
    >M4
    >MP5
    >AK-47
    >Noisy Cricket just have a second FA lower
    >Glock 18

    Uzis are a meme and so are 7.62 NATO full auto rifles.

  6. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Disabled vet here. There is no reason you need any guns. It's one of the only things the DEMS are doing correctly. If I could still walk, I would volunteer to come and take them. You wouldn't do anything anyway. With the new laws in New Mexico, it won't be long now until we can finally put an end to the 2nd Amendment. There is no way our founding fathers could fathom what guns would turn into.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Damn dude sorry you're a mentally disabled vet but frick off with your brain damaged bullshit b8.

      In the event it isn't b8, the founding fathers meant for us to have privately owned warships and cannons so suck my free wiener pussy

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        stop taking the bait
        if someone is anti-gun or pretending to be anti-gun just don't respond to them

  7. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    I would be a good man for all the days of my life for a legal full auto

  8. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    All warfare conducted by spraying out truckloads of ammo into an area for suppression killed the art of precision shooting

    We should ban full auto guns and semi auto guns and stop the mag dumping and return to sniper battles at 500+ yards with bolt and lever action rifles and may the best marksmen win

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      so basically Boer War best war?

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      brainlet take

  9. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    As far as ammo, an increase in demand causes an increase in production. More ammo isn't a bad thing. The bad comes when everyone mag dumps into the dirt, then when say China invades, mag dumps the last box of ammo they have left into to dirt. It also puts hard wear and tear on things that need to be good when they need to be good. That's why you should have your shit clean after shooting, including the barrel, let your groups tighten against say the communists.

    Without over-cleaning of course. Keep your good shit good. Not a bad idea to have some beater clone of your best rifle that you can get good at pissing rounds down range accurately, while also being a good parts gun. All this while buying more ammo than you shoot.

  10. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Draco
    RPD
    AK-47
    SAW
    Saiga
    HK33

  11. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    >Everybody NEEDS a full-auto one
    Strongly agree. Its almost like... the 2nd amendment was intended for every citizen of the US to own said weapons including heavy ordinance (rocket launchers, grenades, etc.)

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Nope, the Founders did NOT ever want citizens to have such war weapons. Reasonable defense from bears, or to hunt with? Yes with government approval. But they never dreamed people would oppose government and be Bad Citizens. That's why they supported the
      Union and defeated slaver traitors in the UNcivil war.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        Nice b8 m8 i r8.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *