UN ANTI-GUN TREATY IS DEAD BEFORE ARRIVAL

OmSigDAVID wrote:

I never thought about it much;
maybe because I 'm keeping my guns here.

Since you are keeping your guns here, why are you obsessing about the UN export/import treaty?

I am surprised that someone that claims to be a member of MENSA can be so ignorant and incapable of critical thinking.

You would be a great judge of critical thinking.


Tell us again how changing the rate of fire in a weapon is merely a cosmetic feature.

Tell us again how you think the Defense department is spending all this money on cosmetic features on their weapons that have no functional use while at the same time you think it is OK they spend that money.

You would be a great judge of critical thinking.

Tell us again how changing the rate of fire in a weapon is merely a cosmetic feature.

Tell us again how you think the Defense department is spending all this money on cosmetic features on their weapons that have no functional use while at the same time you think it is OK they spend that money.

I have pointed out several times, however, the fact that assault weapons do not have a greater rate of fire.

I don't think having a pistol grip makes a gun particularly more expensive than a gun without a pistol grip.

So you are arguing that a M-1 rifle is just as efficient as an AR-15? So why does the military spend so much money on it's current weapons when an M-1 would be just as good.

oralloy wrote:

I have pointed out several times, however, the fact that assault weapons do not have a greater rate of fire.

Now that is quite funny. You are now arguing that changing a clip on a weapon takes no time at all. Do you really expect us to believe that oralloy?

oralloy wrote:

I don't think having a pistol grip makes a gun particularly more expensive than a gun without a pistol grip.

Let me ask you this again oralloy. Which is easier to hold with one hand and fire? A rifle with a pistol grip or one without?