Posted on 09/21/2019 1:50:12 PM PDT by Mr. Mojo
Democrat presidential hopeful Robert “Beto” O’Rourke responded to those who want to keep their AR-15s by asking why they do not pursue ownership of a bazooka as well.
O’Rourke’s comment came after a gun-totting mother in Aurora, Colorado, told him that he was not taking her guns.
O’Rourke later took to Twitter and wrote, “A woman in CO told me ‘hell no’ she won’t give back her AR-15. I listened, but by her logic: Why shouldn’t you be allowed to have a bazooka or a tank?”
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
In the Founders era, private individuals owned cannons. Private individuals could own warships, otherwise being able to license privateers through “letters of marque and reprisal” would not have worked.
I think this piece of crap is working for the police state to create a database of those that oppose gun confiscation. What he is doing is baiting his opposition into making statements on social media that will be picked up by the surveillance state.
What a dick.
Tanks are legal to purchase and own.
How about a cannon? Aren’t they legal in most states?
Beat me to it TS
I’ve now lost count of how many old (EX)friends from the northeast who are appalled that I own ar 15s and other weapons
“why can’t you buy a grenade launcher then?”
You CAN! Want a bazooka? You CAN
Just pay the ATF the large applicable explosive fees and the permit costs and vola, it’s yours.
Getting shell for these arms is a problem, but not insurmountable
Spent tubes are/were sold by military surplus vendors. They have been turned in at gun buybacks (For a profit. Many police don't know that once fired, they are harmless and useless.)
Holy crap. Hell hath frozen over. I actually agree with Irish Bob Beto on a subject. I would love to own a bazooka, it would be great fun to go to a bazooka range and blow shit up. I had occasion back in the late 80’s early 90’s time frame to shoot a grenade launcher, 20mm if I remember correctly, at range in East County San Diego where Police Swat teams and the Marines/Navy used. It was great fun I must say.
I lost my bazooka in a tragic boating accident.
If you can afford it why not. Good way to fend off the commie horse when they come for your stuff en mass.
No bias at all...
Reducto ad absurdum
“reduction to the absurd”
Yes, why not?
I’m all for it, but I really want a MK19.
2) The hazard and expense of keeping and bearing bombs, rockets, ships, airplanes, etc. is sufficient to render the point moot.
Ma Barker?
Well, he’s right. And yes, if the Constitution were, in fact observed in the entire law, there would be no restrictions on owning bazookas or thermonuclear bombs. The 2Amd is absolute in the wording, admitting of no exceptions. There are other extraConstitutional restrictions on the owning of any arms and they are market restrictions- who can afford an ICBM? What company would build them for sale to the general public?
For the price of a plane ticket to Afghanistan, he’d have no trouble getting an armload of RPGs, cheap ... if the tribesment don’t slit his throat.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.