Where do you draw the line?

[Peter]

Your vote counts for everything above it in the list being restricted as well. Option 1 is for Bono and Philip.

Should be amusing

[Bono]

Your vote counts for everything above it in the list being restricted as well. Option 1 is for Bono and Philip.

Should be amusing

You know, ownership of everything in that list up until the anti-tank RPGs is legal, and maybe, just maybe, with a little erm... bonus for the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms employee, you could be able to register the tank as a destructive devide under the NFA.

EDIT: You forgot air guns.

And last time I checked, a rifle was more powerful than a shot gun, since a rifle shoots a bullet, and a shotgun shoots a pellet.

[Gabu]

Somewhere inbetween automatic machine guns and uzis & sawed-off shotguns.  I went with the latter.

[J. J.]

Your vote counts for everything above it in the list being restricted as well. Option 1 is for Bono and Philip.

Should be amusing

You know, ownership of everything in that list up until the anti-tank RPGs is legal, and maybe, just maybe, with a little erm... bonus for the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms employee, you could be able to register the tank as a destructive devide under the NFA.

EDIT: You forgot air guns.

And last time I checked, a rifle was more powerful than a shot gun, since a rifle shoots a bullet, and a shotgun shoots a pellet.

Ah, a shotgun either shoots a lot of pellets or a very large shot.  Neither have the range of a rifle, but in range, they are often more devastating.  Think an entry wound an inch across.

[BobOMac2k2]

Um..rifles.

[KEmperor]

Landmines.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

I voted for Pistols/Handguns but misunderstood the question and thought what you voted for would be allowed. So I should've voted for Semi-Automatic Rifles.

[angus]

replace "want" with "can afford" and I'm with them. 

ah, just kidding.  hard call.  in principle I'd say option 1, but as a practical matter, sometimes my right to swing my fist has to end where your nose begins.  I'm not sure where it ends, but somewhere before nukes I'm pretty sure.  cruisers maybe.  landmines seem a bit awkward, but I suppose, if it comes down to it, you can do your lawn in mines if you want.  don't expect me to accept any invitations to come over for a friendly game of frisbee however.

I think I'm okay with fully automatics. 

rollerbladers really piss me off though.  they're bane of every jogging trail from Seattle to Soho, and everywhere in between.  No rollerblades.  I'd be okay with restrictions on private ownership, or at least licensing after a course in jogging-trail ettiquette required. 

[Dr. Cynic]

Anything up to Uzis and Sawed off Shotguns.

[Bono]

7 others voted for the first option... O_o

[??????????]

Anything up to AK47s.

[Democratic Hawk]

Anything up to pistols/handguns

Dave

[A18]

I voted landmines.

[??????????]

Anything up to pistols/handguns

Dave

Real suprising for a subject. Maybe one day your country can achieve actual freedom and you can call yourself a citizen.

[Tory]

Uzi's and sawnoff shotguns

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

I'm really curious as to why a private citizen would have any reason to own a nuclear weapon, and why anyone who didn't have bad intentions would want to own one.

[Bono]

I'm really curious as to why a private citizen would have any reason to own a nuclear weapon, and why anyone who didn't have bad intentions would want to own one.

It's the principle of it.

[Tory]

I'm really curious as to why a private citizen would have any reason to own a nuclear weapon, and why anyone who didn't have bad intentions would want to own one.

Home protection.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

so letting terrorists kill thousands and nuke large cities is fine because of the principal?

[Bono]

so letting terrorists kill thousands and nuke large cities is fine because of the principal?

I don't know what the principal has to say, but the if the state in principle is morally justified in prohibiting the ownership of nuclear weapons, it is also allowed to prohibit the ownerhip of anything else.

[Democratic Hawk]

Anything up to pistols/handguns

Dave

Real suprising for a subject. Maybe one day your country can achieve actual freedom and you can call yourself a citizen.

By refering to me as a subject, are you implying that your presidential system is superior to our constitutional monarchy?

I have political freedom and rest assured I speak my mind without fear or favour

Dave

[Peter]

I don't know what the principal has to say, but the if the state in principle is morally justified in prohibiting the ownership of nuclear weapons, it is also allowed to prohibit the ownerhip of anything else.

Your basic principle seems to be based on the fact that the government cannot regulate ownership of anything.

Pray tell, do you believe I should have a right to own slaves?

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

I believe Bono has said in the past one of the reasons why he hates Lincoln so much is that he interfered with slavery, because while he opposes slavery, he believes it should've still be considered a state issue.

[Peter]

I believe Bono has said in the past one of the reasons why he hates Lincoln so much is that he interfered with slavery, because while he opposes slavery, he believes it should've still be considered a state issue.

One can still support somebodies right to something without personally being in favour of it.

For example, I support an individual right to bear reasonable firearms (as opposed to Tanks), though I personally would never own a firearm on basis of personal morality on the subject.

[Bono]

I don't know what the principal has to say, but the if the state in principle is morally justified in prohibiting the ownership of nuclear weapons, it is also allowed to prohibit the ownerhip of anything else.

Your basic principle seems to be based on the fact that the government cannot regulate ownership of anything.

Pray tell, do you believe I should have a right to own slaves?

depends on your definition of slaves. As long as the 'slave' was someone who agreed to sell teh property he has over his own body, that'd be ok by me.