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.
Ok so you seem like a reasonable person and I believe that. But what you have access to, many many people who are not reasonable or intelligent also have access to.
Now for a little story. One of my former neighbors is former Marine vet of Iraq war, family man and overall good dude. He is also a big time firearm nut and owns over a dozen firearms including a couple pistols and an AR-15's. During one nice weekend he decided he want to hit the range for some shooting and packed about 6 guns in a duffle bag including an AR-15 platform, a 30 06 rifle along with a couple handguns. He walked out of his house and placed the duffle bag in the backseat of his truck, realized he forgot something in his house so he leave the bag in his truck and runs in the house. By his account it was only for about a minute. When he got out, the bag was gone. He had forgot to lock his truck. Here we have a good man, reasonable, and honorable but in a momentary lapse of focus he allowed 6 guns to hit the streets of our cities. There is a strong chance those guns will inevitably end up in the hands of a criminal. Stories like this happen in this country everyday. His possession of those weapons enabled criminals possession of those weapons and all through a one minute lapse of focus.
OK, and in what part of that story does something happen that is sufficient cause for ME TO LOSE MY RIGHTS? All kinds of bad people will do bad things every freaking day, but does that mean I, along with every other law abiding, non-aggressive, peaceful citizen should lose a right every time they do?
People with multiple DUIs still get licenses, and not once has a DUI idiot killing someone in their car caused me to have my license revoked. According to the anti-gun logic, it should be. Because it is not the DUI driver at fault, it was the car, the license and the alcohol that did the killing. So we should ban cars and alcohol because some people misuse them horrifically.
Why does one person's bad actions result in everyone else being punished, because that is what removing rights by force is - a punishment? A few million semiautomatic weapons in the hands of private citizens killed exactly nobody today, same as yesterday, same as tomorrow. Why should those people, who have never caused harm or broken a law now be denied a thing that is currently perfectly legal and within their constitutionally protected, natural individual rights?
If your dog craps on the carpet, do you go beat your neighbor's cat as a remedy? Because that is what this is. Sociopath_Paddock kills people with semiauto rifle, therefore Volobjectitarian should be punished and lose his right to own a semiautomatic rifle. Bad Guy A does a bad thing with item X, therefore Good Guy B who did nothing at all should lose his right to possess X. It's absurd on the face of it.
Same legal requirements for owning a gun as for owning a car.
With the added requirement of a physiological exam.
Same rules for buying and selling a gun as would apply to a car.
Possessing a firearm that is not registered to you is an automatic felony and a minimum 10 year sentence.
These rules will not effect hunters in the slightest, nor will it eliminate home owners or shop owners from possessing useful tools for defending themselves, like a shotgun for example. Criminals would not want to carry a gun since its an automatic prison sentence for simple possession. Gun thefts would plummet.
Chalk up yet another big-govt advocate who believes
(a) We should give government the authority to regulate our personal guns, and
(b) Government legislation can somehow do something to solve the problem.
...despite years (actually centuries) of experience proving otherwise, on both counts.
It's illustrative to note that, despite the admitted failure of all the "gun control" legislation we've had so far, the big-govt advocate's reaction isn't to give up on a failed program. Instead, it's to pile on MORE regulations and restrictions!
Again what is your criteria? In my entire life I am not aware of an attack on a private home by multiple armed attackers except for the police. So what do you think are the odds of such an event happening?
Slim to none. But again, why should the odds of a thing preclude me from preparing for them if I so choose? I am not asking anyone to pay for my weapons or ammunition. Nobody comes to harm from my ownership of my weapons and ammunition either. So why must I now lose my right to own these weapons and that ammunition, just because you think I won't ever need them?
I have broken no laws, caused no harm, not initiated force upon anyone, nothing. I am the textbook definition of a law abiding citizen, but because YOU feel that scenarios that would make a semiautomatic rifle the right tool for the job are extremely rare, that I should lose the right to own them?
All these discussions center on your side justifying why I (and 50 million other innocent people) should be punished for something I had nothing to do with and would/have/could never do. Because that is what we are talking about, punishing the innocent because of what the guilty have done.
Slim to none. But again, why should the odds of a thing preclude me from preparing for them if I so choose? I am not asking anyone to pay for my weapons or ammunition. Nobody comes to harm from my ownership of my weapons and ammunition either. So why must I now lose my right to own these weapons and that ammunition, just because you think I won't ever need them?
I have broken no laws, caused no harm, not initiated force upon anyone, nothing. I am the textbook definition of a law abiding citizen, but because YOU feel that scenarios that would make a semiautomatic rifle the right tool for the job are extremely rare, that I should lose the right to own them?
All these discussions center on your side justifying why I (and 50 million other innocent people) should be punished for something I had nothing to do with and would/have/could never do. Because that is what we are talking about, punishing the innocent because of what the guilty have done.
"You must spread some reputation around before giving it to Volobjectarian again."
Military need for firearms to defend our freedoms-good
Individual need for firearms to defend life, limb and property-bad
How do you recocile these two opinions?
If I had said that you would have a point. Being as I didn't say that, all I can do is suggest you get someone with better reading comprehension skills than yourself to read what I said and explain to you with picture drawings or something.
If you wish to claim I did in fact say this, feel free to quote my post where I did so. But heres a clue, chief. I was talking quantities.
OK, and in what part of that story does something happen that is sufficient cause for ME TO LOSE MY RIGHTS? All kinds of bad people will do bad things every freaking day, but does that mean I, along with every other law abiding, non-aggressive, peaceful citizen should lose a right every time they do?
Your 2nd amendment right is already be infringed upon. It has been since before you were born.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Volobjectitarian
People with multiple DUIs still get licenses, and not once has a DUI idiot killing someone in their car caused me to have my license revoked. According to the anti-gun logic, it should be. Because it is not the DUI driver at fault, it was the car, the license and the alcohol that did the killing. So we should ban cars and alcohol because some people misuse them horrifically.
Reductio ad absurdum. One object is designed for transportation and is vital to everyday life of almost every adult in the country. The other item is a tool specifically designed for a single purpose, to kill a person. It doesn't take much imagination to assume we should handle these items differently. Also steps have been take over the last 40 years to reduce drunk driving and it has been successful. Everything from road checks to breathalyzer starters on cars. Nothing has been done to reduce gun violence.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Volobjectitarian
Why does one person's bad actions result in everyone else being punished, because that is what removing rights by force is - a punishment? A few million semiautomatic weapons in the hands of private citizens killed exactly nobody today, same as yesterday, same as tomorrow. Why should those people, who have never caused harm or broken a law now be denied a thing that is currently perfectly legal and within their constitutionally protected, natural individual rights?
Civilized people understand the notion that not everyone should have access to everything. Its why 99.9999% of the population are not trusted with our nations nuclear codes. Its why you and I are not allowed to possess industrial grade acids or hand grenades.
In all seriousness do you feel your rights are violated because you can't own grenades or a tank or land mines?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Volobjectitarian
If your dog craps on the carpet, do you go beat your neighbor's cat as a remedy? Because that is what this is. Sociopath_Paddock kills people with semiauto rifle, therefore Volobjectitarian should be punished and lose his right to own a semiautomatic rifle. Bad Guy A does a bad thing with item X, therefore Good Guy B who did nothing at all should lose his right to possess X. It's absurd on the face of it.
Speaking of absurd, this is how your logic can be applied.
Since I have never hurt anyone with explosives there is no reason why I shouldn't be allowed to carry explosives on an airplane or into a school. Why should I lose my rights to use and carry explosives at will because of what some other guy has done.
Chalk up yet another big-govt advocate who believes
(a) We should give government the authority to regulate our personal guns, and
(b) Government legislation can somehow do something to solve the problem.
...despite years (actually centuries) of experience proving otherwise, on both counts.
It's illustrative to note that, despite the admitted failure of all the "gun control" legislation we've had so far, the big-govt advocate's reaction isn't to give up on a failed program. Instead, it's to pile on MORE regulations and restrictions!
You are right, it doesn't work which is why we are having all of these killings by people using belt feed machine guns and RPGs.
Interesting to note how items that are highly restrictive aren't used very often to commit crimes or mass murder.
Slim to none. But again, why should the odds of a thing preclude me from preparing for them if I so choose? I am not asking anyone to pay for my weapons or ammunition. Nobody comes to harm from my ownership of my weapons and ammunition either. So why must I now lose my right to own these weapons and that ammunition, just because you think I won't ever need them?
I have broken no laws, caused no harm, not initiated force upon anyone, nothing. I am the textbook definition of a law abiding citizen, but because YOU feel that scenarios that would make a semiautomatic rifle the right tool for the job are extremely rare, that I should lose the right to own them?
All these discussions center on your side justifying why I (and 50 million other innocent people) should be punished for something I had nothing to do with and would/have/could never do. Because that is what we are talking about, punishing the innocent because of what the guilty have done.
You are presently fine. If however in its wisdom the government decided that all of certain classes of guns were illegal your gun becomes illegal and, as a good law abiding citizen you would turn it in.
I would think the government could ban narrowly by specific or broad type.
And I think the point was you are not actually losing very much.
Again what is your criteria? In my entire life I am not aware of an attack on a private home by multiple armed attackers except for the police. So what do you think are the odds of such an event happening?
Do live under a rock? There are thousands of examples of armed home invasions every year, I could find you a few hundred on YouTube right now.
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.
