fantôme profane;3186919 said:
Thank you for that explanation. Now could you explain to me why a civilian would need a "clone of a M-16"? What is the purpose of this gun? Is it actually used for hunting?
LOL, what you seem to misunderstand is, I am not required to demonstrate a need for any weapon, I have an absolute right to own any weapons without regard to my present need.
Need has nothing to do with my second amendment right. :sorry1:
If you must know, While a pistol or shotgun would meet any present need I have to defend myself from an individual. If there was ever a group of armed assailants who tried to attack me, an assault rifle would be the exact tool I would need to defend myself.
An AK47 can penetrate body armor. If say an UN force came to this country to disarm me, an assualt weapon would be an excellent tool to use to resist this action against my rights.
As a free man, I have every right to possess any means necessary to protect myself from any threat to my second amendment freedoms.
I don't feel threatened by my local police force, sheriffs department or state police. I recognise their authority over me.
I don't however recognise any foreign government or world authority over my right to bear arms.
I have pledged allegiance to my sovereign country, not any world authority.