What does Law Enforcment use a .50 BMG Rifle for?

[sv_libertarian]

imported post

PT111 wrote:

What does Law Enforcment use a .50 BMG Rifle for?

Better question is what does anyone need one for. Maybe the military has a need for one but an average citizen? And that is the entire purpose of this thread, if LEO can have one then why can't I have one.

Because you can't find the $1500 or so needed to buy an entry level version? Or live in California? Or are prohibited from owning firearms? Those are the only three reason I can think of that you can't have a .50BMG rifle.

 

[amlevin]

imported post

sv_libertarian wrote:

Because you can't find the $1500 or so needed to buy an entry level version? Or live in California? Or are prohibited from owning firearms? Those are the only three reason I can think of that you can't have a .50BMG rifle.

1. Save up for one.

2. Don't live in California.

3. Would you really want a convicted felon or mentally unstable person to have one?

 

[FE427TP]

imported post

amlevin wrote:

3. Would you really want a convicted felon or mentally unstable person to have one?

:quirky

Form 4473 works pretty good to prevent that and do some research into weapons the IRA made, If a person who wants to do evil wants a firearm it's REALLY easy to make one. This forum sure seems to have a LOT of new people spouting the anti-gun rhetoric as though it were fact lately

 

[Tomahawk]

imported post

amlevin wrote:

2. Don't live in California.

3. Would you really want a convicted felon or mentally unstable person to have one?

2. Easier said than done. You move where the work is, and you tend to stay where your career is being built. But this is still good advice. Wouldn't it be funny if all the submitizens of California moved out and left only politicians and government employees behind? How would those remaining support themselves without honest workers to leech of off?

3. Depends on what kind of felony. And besides, if the guy is really that dangerous, why is he not in jail?

 

[sv_libertarian]

imported post

Tomahawk wrote:

2. Easier said than done. You move where the work is, and you tend to stay where your career is being built. But this is still good advice. Wouldn't it be funny if all the submitizens of California moved out and left only politicians and government employees behind? How would those remaining support themselves without honest workers to leech of off?

Who is John Galt?

 

[Tomahawk]

imported post

sv_libertarian wrote:

Tomahawk wrote:

2. Easier said than done. You move where the work is, and you tend to stay where your career is being built. But this is still good advice. Wouldn't it be funny if all the submitizens of California moved out and left only politicians and government employees behind? How would those remaining support themselves without honest workers to leech of off?

Who is John Galt?

So far the actor hasn't been picked yet... http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0480239/

 

[sv_libertarian]

imported post

Best response I've gotten to that question! Hope they don't screw the book up.

 

[Tomahawk]

imported post

sv_libertarian wrote:

Best response I've gotten to that question! Hope they don't screw the book up.

According to the FAQ Angelina Jolie will play Dagny Taggert. Providing the film actually gets finished, that is.

 

[sv_libertarian]

imported post

Angelina Jolie as Dagny Taggart? I don't know how I feel about that, but it could work.

 

[PT111]

imported post

I've got no problems with whoever wants one having one, just wondering why the complaints about LEO having one. Maybe they just want to show it off like the average person that wants one wants it for.

 

[Tomahawk]

imported post

PT111 wrote:

I've got no problems with whoever wants one having one, just wondering why the complaints about LEO having one. Maybe they just want to show it off like the average person that wants one wants it for.

Law enforcement organizations do not have the right to bear arms. They have only the authority to bear certain arms issued them by the governments they report to.

The discussion of which weapons are and are not appropriate for law enforcement officers is a valid one.

In this era when police agencies are getting so much fudge from the fed gov to buy neat toys, allowing them to do so without adult supervision is foolish. Like any governemtn agency, they will spend like there's no tomorrow. Then they start looking for an excuse to justify the stuff they buy, which is why small towns send out SWAT teams for every little thing.

Surely you don't think government agencies should be free to do whatever they want?