They had to form a government to be able to form an army, to have a means to make laws, and to make payments/salary of the troops, buy weapons, to buy gunpowder and feed troops.
Contractor personnel may attend a government office picnic, so long as the time spent attending the event is not charged to the government.
There are several negative characteristics of the US government. Specifically, political parties enjoy fighting with each other more than they actually want to help the people. Additionally, government is costly and does not seem to accomplish a whole lot.
According to the Constitution, the federal government is responsible for arming and organizing the state militias (today most militias are called national guards). This means that the federal government buys the weapons and sets requirements and standards for each state's militia. Because of the Second Amendment, however, the federal government cannot disband the militias.
AnswerThe US had won the war. This was between USA and Russia to see who had a stronger military. Near the end of the war Russia's government collasped and they could not fund the military to make stronger weapons. But this was not a real war with combat.
should citizens in usa be banned to have assault weapons
Mitt Romney does not have the authority to unilaterally ban assault weapons.
India is already a nuclear power, and they have nuclear weapons on hand. They have already made the decision to "encourage" nuclear weapons, and presumably for increasing their own security.
no
The assault weapons ban worked in that it reduced the number of crimes committed with the banned guns, but it did not reduce crime overall.
yes. they can use any weapons that are allowed in the Codex: Space Marines.
Assault Weapons generally refer to firearms that have a burst or full auto feature. Most countries have such bans, even weapons they think look like assault weapons, and of course many countries ban personal ownership of any weapons. This is very true for countries in which the government does not enjoy the support of the people. The results have meant many governments maintaining control for much longer than they would otherwise. There have been little to no effect on crime because such weapons are very expensive and crime is a cultural matter more than access to knifes or weapons.
It has already been done. South Africa dismantled its 6 nuclear weapons in 1991.
Nuke
No, this would require legislation from Congress. This is because currently there is no law banning assault weapons for an executive order to clarify the scope of.
Automatic weapons as we usually think of them are really semi-automatic. That is, you fire one bullet for each trigger pull, and the weapon charges itself with a new bullet automatically. These are not assault weapons, though most politicians think they are. Real automatic weapons will 'spray' out a stream of bullets as long as the trigger is kept pulled. These ARE considered assault weapons. They were outlawed largely because of their use by gangsters who had more firepower with them than the police did. Automatic weapons are pretty dangerous because of all the firepower they emit. The killings that you read about where "Assault" weapons have been used, have NOT used assault weapons, only semi-automatic weapons.
you cant