Flamethrowers are basically guns that shoot pure destruction.
No efficient use.
To be used and carried as if it were a weapon? Absolutely not. I can see where my point on the ban of assault rifles is arguable but no citizen needs a flamethrower. It's too incredibly dangerous for a citizen to use it. I'm not saying the citizen is the danger but the weapon itself is. It's meant for a mass spread of destruction and should only be allowed in terms of warfare.
For there intended use they are effective, that's clearing small bunkers & tunnels. If you want to go in and clear them by hand you have that option if you would prefer.
There are circumstances where having a flamethrower would make life SOOOO much easier. Sure it's pretty gruesome but my opinion is that inhumane killing in war is the biggest oxymoron on the planet.
remeber the huge snow storm that devastated parts of the country well if we had flamthrowers we could have melted all teh snow at a cheaper cost and a faster rate where as 13 million was spent per nothern state on salt and workers. plus a guy was arrested for trying the idea on the snow on his own property so its unfair to some of us who want to save money is should not be used as a weapon though only a tool
that was stupid to say yes @the people that said yes