Should civilians be allowed to own machine guns?

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

They're obviously not common in the US, but are nonetheless legal to own but very expensive and require a pristine record, an extensive background check, and local authorities are notified whenever a person wishes to own or transport a machine gun.

[TPIG]

The current process, with the extensive application, finger-printing process and other checks seems thorough enough and not in need of any big change.

[fhtagn]

The current process, with the extensive application, finger-printing process and other checks seems thorough enough and not in need of any big change.

[Suburbia]

No. No Assault weapons, NO.

[courts]

The current process, with the extensive application, finger-printing process and other checks seems thorough enough and not in need of any big change.

yeah it seems to be working out ok. i'm not so sure that sort of gun control would work as well with semi automatics because there are a lot more of those already though

[dead0man]

No. No Assault weapons, NO.

Two crime have been committed with legal machine guns since 1934 and I think both of those involved cops.  Restricting them further is just dumb.

[Mr. Reactionary]

Repeal the Hughes Amendment!!!

[Goldwater]

The current process, with the extensive application, finger-printing process and other checks seems thorough enough and not in need of any big change.

[Sir Mohamed]

No, because they are weapons of war. They don't belong into the hands of civilians, as they have nothing to do with protection or hunting. Instead, they are posing a danger because each weapon in private hands has a serious risk to get into the hand of some bad dude. I wouldn't mind to allow them in shooting clubs for sports, as long as they remain on that closed territory/area.

[RINO Tom]

The current process, with the extensive application, finger-printing process and other checks seems thorough enough and not in need of any big change.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Repeal the Hughes Amendment!!!

I actually agree.  All it has done is provide a windfall to current owners of machine guns.  With it's repeal, I'd expect maybe a 10% increase in the number of machine guns in private hands, and their price would collapse to around 10% of what they are now.

[WritOfCertiorari]

If anyone didn’t know, the sale and possession of machine guns for civilians was banned in 1986, but existing guns were grandfathered in. As you can imagine, prices are extremely high and the chance of someone buying one to use for a crime is basically zero.

[Shameless Lefty Hack]

IMO specific equipment isn't and never will be the problem with gun control. It's about making sure that the weapon owning population is as responsible as possible.

I'm fine with machine gun ownership (ie: a fairly relaxed process from the current ban on new purchases) if *all * gun owners have to have a license that requires a certain minimum of range time per year to maintain, locks are mandatory with each firearm purchased, and domestic violence convictions result in an indefinitely suspended license.

[7,052,770]

No. No Assault weapons, NO.

Two crime have been committed with legal machine guns since 1934 and I think both of those involved cops.  Restricting them further is just dumb.

So I guess we should open up ICBMs to private ownership as well?

[dead0man]

wait wait wait....you think it's laws that keep regular folk from buying ICBMs?  Why would you think you couldn't own an ICBM?   You don't even need to use a govt facility anymore!  This is why gun nuts always defeat gun control nuts.....because you guys are funking stupid.


excellent "gotcha" as always Harry.

[Torie]

Unless you think (erroneously) that it is protected by the Second Amendment, why should any civilian own a machine gun? Yeah, it is nice that there are tight restrictions, but there is no upside to folks owning such a weapon, to offset the downside (e.g., with more such weapons extant in the civilian population, the odds go up they might fall into the wrong hands, or perhaps the once fine chap who legally obtained such a weapon, later has a nervous breakdown or goes psychotic, among other things), so my answer is no. Is it legal anywhere to hunt with a machine gun? I suspect not.

[dead0man]

I'm pretty sure you can hunt wild boar in Texas with anything.

yep (some people are going to be triggered by this, so, if the idea of hunting intelligent mammals from a helicopter with a machine gun offends you....oh...I think I just did it...nevermind!)

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Torie]

Does a "semi-automatic AR-15" fall into the category of a "machine gun?" I don't pretend to know that much about guns. To me a machine gun is a gun that spews out a lot of bullets in very rapid succession, like I see in war movies. I don't have an informed opinion as to where exactly the line should be drawn as to what guns should be legal to own, and what guns should not be legal to own. It needs to be drawn somewhere obviously.

[dead0man]

Does a "semi-automatic AR-15" fall into the category of a "machine gun?"

no, it's a round every pull of the trigger.  The last bit talks about the machine guns.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Sure, and it has been in 1934 and 1986 and it hasn't been a problem so far.

[WritOfCertiorari]

The big distinction is semi-automatic vs automatic. A machine gun is a specific type of automatic gun that fires from a belt, usually, and usually fires larger caliber rounds, anyway. A submachine gun is similar, but fires pistol rounds instead.

If you really want to get into the details, a machine gun is the most inconvenient thing to use in a crime because its not portable, generally. Imagine having to set that thing up. Someone would just tackle you before you could.

If some terrorist really could plausibly get their hands on one, it would have happened. By the way, maybe you should be more concerned about the fact that Russia has NUKES lying around.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

I'm pretty sure you can hunt wild boar in Texas with anything.

yep (some people are going to be triggered by this, so, if the idea of hunting intelligent mammals from a helicopter with a machine gun offends you....oh...I think I just did it...nevermind!)

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Why???

[dead0man]

Wild boar is a big problem in the south.  link - The Smithsonian

You must be logged in to read this quote.

It's a huge problem and hunting them with machine guns from helicopters isn't going to stop it.

[Mr. Reactionary]

We need machine guns to shoot the government when its tyrannical.

[BenBurch]

IMO specific equipment isn't and never will be the problem with gun control. It's about making sure that the weapon owning population is as responsible as possible.

I'm fine with machine gun ownership (ie: a fairly relaxed process from the current ban on new purchases) if *all * gun owners have to have a license that requires a certain minimum of range time per year to maintain, locks are mandatory with each firearm purchased, and domestic violence convictions result in an indefinitely suspended license.

I actually agree, except for the locks, in the case of home-defense.

[UlmerFudd]

The current process, with the extensive application, finger-printing process and other checks seems thorough enough and not in need of any big change.