Jump to content

Apparently flamethrowers are legal to own and use in the USA


Thatonesandwitch

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 50
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I'll begin by quoting the late George Carlin; "The very existence of flamethrowers proves that some time, somewhere, someone said to themselves, you know, I want to set those people over there on fire, but I'm not close enough to get the job done." 

 

... Nothing about allowing the average person [let alone the average American (As an American, I can't call out any other nation. Is it the same the world over?)] access to a serious incendiary device says "Good idea". Humans have a -wonderful- track record of using dangerous devices in a safe and orderly fashion, don't they? 

 

I think there are enough acres currently on fire in the world. Let's not add to that if we can help it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll begin by quoting the late George Carlin; "The very existence of flamethrowers proves that some time, somewhere, someone said to themselves, you know, I want to set those people over there on fire, but I'm not close enough to get the job done."

... Nothing about allowing the average person [let alone the average American (As an American, I can't call out any other nation. Is it the same the world over?)] access to a serious incendiary device says "Good idea". Humans have a -wonderful- track record of using dangerous devices in a safe and orderly fashion, don't they?

I think there are enough acres currently on fire in the world. Let's not add to that if we can help it.

Or you can say "I really want that paper target over there to start on fire." Just because something was made for war doesn't mean its not something fun can be had with. As for "serious incendiary device", there's a reason that flamethrowers aren't used in battle anymore, and it has nothing to do with treaties. (Hint: They're not a very good weapon)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I'll begin by quoting the late George Carlin; "The very existence of flamethrowers proves that some time, somewhere, someone said to themselves, you know, I want to set those people over there on fire, but I'm not close enough to get the job done."

... Nothing about allowing the average person [let alone the average American (As an American, I can't call out any other nation. Is it the same the world over?)] access to a serious incendiary device says "Good idea". Humans have a -wonderful- track record of using dangerous devices in a safe and orderly fashion, don't they?

I think there are enough acres currently on fire in the world. Let's not add to that if we can help it.

Or you can say "I really want that paper target over there to start on fire." Just because something was made for war doesn't mean its not something fun can be had with. As for "serious incendiary device", there's a reason that flamethrowers aren't used in battle anymore, and it has nothing to do with treaties. (Hint: They're not a very good weapon)

 

So you're saying a flamethrower is -not- in fact a serious incendiary device? May I ask what it is, then? I must have it confused with something else. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll begin by quoting the late George Carlin; "The very existence of flamethrowers proves that some time, somewhere, someone said to themselves, you know, I want to set those people over there on fire, but I'm not close enough to get the job done."

... Nothing about allowing the average person [let alone the average American (As an American, I can't call out any other nation. Is it the same the world over?)] access to a serious incendiary device says "Good idea". Humans have a -wonderful- track record of using dangerous devices in a safe and orderly fashion, don't they?

I think there are enough acres currently on fire in the world. Let's not add to that if we can help it.

Or you can say "I really want that paper target over there to start on fire." Just because something was made for war doesn't mean its not something fun can be had with. As for "serious incendiary device", there's a reason that flamethrowers aren't used in battle anymore, and it has nothing to do with treaties. (Hint: They're not a very good weapon)

So you're saying a flamethrower is -not- in fact a serious incendiary device? May I ask what it is, then? I must have it confused with something else.

That's assuming there is such a thing as a "serious"-anything device. It starts big fires? Yep! Starts lots of people on fire? Sure does! Is everyone suffering because of this? Nope!

Have a little faith in humanity, just because people can own a flamethrower doesn't mean everyone's going to go out and toast their friends tomorrow night.

If some psychopath wants to go on a murder spree, there's far more efficient ways of going about it, let alone starting fires.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I'll begin by quoting the late George Carlin; "The very existence of flamethrowers proves that some time, somewhere, someone said to themselves, you know, I want to set those people over there on fire, but I'm not close enough to get the job done."

... Nothing about allowing the average person [let alone the average American (As an American, I can't call out any other nation. Is it the same the world over?)] access to a serious incendiary device says "Good idea". Humans have a -wonderful- track record of using dangerous devices in a safe and orderly fashion, don't they?

I think there are enough acres currently on fire in the world. Let's not add to that if we can help it.

Or you can say "I really want that paper target over there to start on fire." Just because something was made for war doesn't mean its not something fun can be had with. As for "serious incendiary device", there's a reason that flamethrowers aren't used in battle anymore, and it has nothing to do with treaties. (Hint: They're not a very good weapon)

 

 

Actually there's several reasons they're not used much any more, some of them to do with treaties (they can't be used against civilian populations or undergrowth anymore, and there are several limitations beyond that as well that severely hamper their effective power). Aside from them being somewhat illegal to use these days, they're also much less practical than they used to be. They were fantastic weapons for thick, heavy ground fighting- which is not a combat tactic in play today, with a focus on tactical strikes, air superiority, and long range unmanned weapons. They were also extremely useful in conflicts like Korea where enemies hid in underbrush and- almost as importantly- tunnels.

 

Saying "flamethrowers aren't a very good weapon" is as uninformed as saying "swords aren't a very good weapon" just because they aren't used in modern warfare. Warfare changes, that doesn't devalue the contribution of the weapons that came before. You could make the case "flamethrowers aren't as practical in the current form of warfare as they used to be," but saying they aren't capable weapons is misinformed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They can be used against trees still, just not if the trees are the target, not that trees are much of a problem in most modern wars...

But regardless, in this day and age, a sword, undeniably, is a poor combat weapon for the same general reason flamethrowers are. They're products of they're times. Hideous destructive things once, but now they're just novelties, regardless of what kind of history is behind them. So, yes, compared to modern fighting equipment, flamethrowers are no longer viable enough to pose a significant threat to the general wellbeing.

And if you're somewhere that flamethrowers ARE being used against you, I think allowing the public to buy them off eBay is the least of your concerns.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They can be used against trees still, just not if the trees are the target, not that trees are much of a problem in most modern wars...

But regardless, in this day and age, a sword, undeniably, is a poor combat weapon for the same general reason flamethrowers are. They're products of they're times. Hideous destructive things once, but now they're just novelties, regardless of what kind of history is behind them. So, yes, compared to modern fighting equipment, flamethrowers are no longer viable enough to pose a significant threat to the general wellbeing.

And if you're somewhere that flamethrowers ARE being used against you, I think allowing the public to buy them off eBay is the least of your concerns.

 

Calling outdated things bad is misguided. That's all I'm saying. Relative to modern warfare tactics, no, a flamethrower is not particularly effective. But that's not even close to what you said in your post about it.

 

Regardless, a things effectiveness in warfare doesn't translate to its ability to be used for severe civil harm. A flamethrower can kill a room full of people MUCH faster than a gun can, for instance (well, to be technical, they might not be dead right away but their fates will be sealed much quicker). It's also capable of being incredibly destructive to personal property. Am I for or against them being in the hands of civvies? Dunno. But denying their effectiveness is disrespecting the danger of a powerful tool.

 

And, to be honest, people not respecting weapons is far more dangerous than the weapons themselves.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think bioweapons make the best close combat personally, though its a little dangerous to yourself.

Back on the main topic though, can you feasibly see a military flamethrower being used for home defense?

Or even better, conceal and carry

If the situation requires a flamethrower, chances are concealing it won't be a problem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think bioweapons make the best close combat personally, though its a little dangerous to yourself.

Back on the main topic though, can you feasibly see a military flamethrower being used for home defense?

Or even better, conceal and carry

I... don't think I'd want to use it for home defense. Starting the barbecue, maybe, but not home defense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted · Hidden by Kirrus, September 19, 2015 - No reason given
Hidden by Kirrus, September 19, 2015 - No reason given

Don't bio-weapons take some time to take effect? Wouldn't that rule them out of home defence?

 

How about a tiny portable hand-held nuclear bullet launcher? In essence you are firing a tiny miniature nuke at people. One with miniature fallout and small ant scale explosions.

 

 

Also one thing is really starting to bother me - ITS DEFENCE with a fricking C. As in C for "Crappy, Crackwhore & Cnut" 

 

fricking americans bastardizing our language and turning it into a muppets language for moron people!!

Link to comment

 

I think bioweapons make the best close combat personally, though its a little dangerous to yourself.

Back on the main topic though, can you feasibly see a military flamethrower being used for home defense?

Or even better, conceal and carry

I... don't think I'd want to use it for home defense. Starting the barbecue, maybe, but not home defense.

 

Do you know how easy it is to discourage bandits when you blast flames at them?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think bioweapons make the best close combat personally, though its a little dangerous to yourself.

Back on the main topic though, can you feasibly see a military flamethrower being used for home defense?

Or even better, conceal and carry

I... don't think I'd want to use it for home defense. Starting the barbecue, maybe, but not home defense.

Do you know how easy it is to discourage bandits when you blast flames at them?

You wouldn't even need the flamethrower if they'd legalize household landmines! Who'll rob your house if its covered in explosives? Ain't no bandit wanna deal with that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...