taking it that far if I bought up land around you i could land lock you
Maybe in your state, though I seriously doubt it. Not here in Georgia, you are required by law in that situation to allow the 'land locked' owner access to his land. There is a law in Texas that 'once a road, always a road.' My informant on this says that even if a road hasn't been used in fifty years and goes across your property, it can't legally be blocked off from access.
Now, on to weapons of war and the 2nd Amendment.
My take on sarin and other WMD's. If a responsible citizen cannot be trusted with some weapon then neither can the government. There is always an individual who has control of those weapons. Think about Richard Nixon. Don't know about you but the majority of my fellow citizens are more responsible than he was...
After reading this thread, I can see why I and my fellow full auto owners were thrown beneath the bus by the NRA in 1986. And I still belong to and support the NRA.
The idea that most beltfeds would be used in crime is ridiculous.
Most of them are extremely heavy and are crew served weapons.
Maybe the SAW could be so used but even without the 86 FOPA ban on new machineguns, the price of a SAW to the government is about $4K.
Elitist because I own a machinegun? Nope. I was lucky enough to get mine before the 86 ban. Including the cost of the UZI, the cost of conversion, and the $200 tax stamp. I've got about $975 1986 dollars in it. That inflates to $1820.87 in 2007 dollars. They are going for up to $5000 now. Why? It's not the greedy owners or dealers. It's because the 86 ban restricted the supply while the demand remained steady. Ask any economist what the result will be.
Give you another example. BAR's are going for up to $20K. A couple of years ago, a company sent someone to Europe on a search. This guy found some arsenal stored BAR's and bought them. Then he hired someone to torch cut the receivers to ATF requirements. While he was doing this, the company was going through the process with ATF and customs to import the cut BAR's into the country. The BAR's were then placed in a container and shipped to the US where they were transported to the company. The company then packaged the BAR's and advertised them for sale for $700 each. Now if the company was allowed to import them whole and uncut, the company would not be out of the expense of having them torch cut and you would be able to purchase that BAR for less than $700. Instead of $20,000. That's what our government and our elected leaders have done to us. How do you know a politician is lying? Simple. The politician's lips are moving. Heads- Republicans and tails- Democrats. Flip it all you want, it is still the same coin.
And there is a difference between sales of military technology to a citizen and sales to a foreign, hostile country. A big difference. I own military technology that is restricted from import without specific licensing. That should be banned? Hate to tell you this, but your computer is restricted technology for import. Should it be banned?