Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I've seen a few threads wondering why cars aren't banned. Or swimming pools, or knives... even male organs of reproduction... ... strained analogies to be sure. Gun lovers have no shame. Are there any good analogies? Yes there are: alcohol and tobacco. Not coincidentally both are administered together with guns by the ATF. Alcohol has no health improving properties, it will not aid in weight loss, blood pressure reduction or sexual function. It is simply a relatively inexpensive depressant drug. It is responsible for a number of chronic and/or fatal conditions if abused. Similarly, although cigarettes were once marketed as improving breathing capacity, that attribute has mainly been debunked and in light of the overall negative health outcomes linked to cigarettes, their aid in exercising of the thoracic muscles is laughably irrelevant. Beer, Hard Liquor, Cigarettes and Firearms exist because they are addictive. People want them, and have been willing to pay high prices for them. Consequently the manufacture of them has been extremely lucrative. With the kind of money alcohol, tobacco and firearms manufacturers have made they now have the ability to buy politicians and other elected officials. If the New Town Tragedy will not be sufficient to provide support for an Assault Weapon Ban, the game is well and truly over. The Money has won. Keep your heads down and try to stay safe, my friends.
ATF exists because of TAXES. They dont do squat to make you safe. they are a goverment agency running amuck. There work is nothing more than checking to see if all federal taxes are paid. They are not to help you with anything. The "assault" weapons ban will fail because most anti gunners dont have a clue about these black scary guns. They dont know facts from feelings.
I CHOSE to quit smoking two years ago and I CHOSE to quit drinking more than 15 years ago. I still have the right to change my mind about either and legally go to the store and buy one or both of them. Should I CHOOSE to no longer own guns, it will be my decision. This is all about the right to make that choice.
I CHOSE to quit smoking two years ago and I CHOSE to quit drinking more than 15 years ago. I still have the right to change my mind about either and legally go to the store and buy one or both of them. Should I CHOOSE to no longer own guns, it will be my decision. This is all about the right to make that choice.
You will notice that no one is coming after your cigarettes, should you CHOOSE to resume the habit. No one is (ever again) coming for your booze, should you CHOOSE TO resume that habit. And finally, no one is coming after your guns. Taking money off the manufacturers of all three is much more important than public safety. These hysterical threads starters should get a clue.
Literally tens of millions of people have owned and shot guns their entire lives and NEVER HURT THEMSELVES OR ANYONE ELSE. Plenty others have used their guns to preserve lives, usually without even firing a shot.
Try to find that many smokers and heavy drinkers with the same result.
Guns are tools. Like a hammer or an automobile, they only do what the bag of flesh handling them wants to do.
Beer, Hard Liquor, Cigarettes and Firearms exist because they are addictive... If the New Town Tragedy will not be sufficient to provide support for an Assault Weapon Ban, the game is well and truly over. The Money has won. Keep your heads down and try to stay safe, my friends.
Guns are addictive like cigarettes and liquor? This should make for an interesting lesson in physiology. If the "New Town Tragedy" [sic] proves not sufficient to bring reinstatement of the so-called "assault weapon" ban, it will not mean that the money has won, it will mean that common sense has won. After all, having an "assault weapons" ban in place would not have prevented this tragedy, nor would it prevent a similar incident in the future. Wouldn't it make common sense to try to enact measures that might conceivably prevent future occurences, such as regulation of SSRI patients? It would be a victory for common sense, and perhaps for the proper use of capitalization as well.
I've seen a few threads wondering why cars aren't banned.
Besides the fact that this is one of the more absurd arguments, there are quite few cars that are banned from the U.S. because they have been deemed incapable of meeting American safety standards.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
