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.
tony martin of england is still in jail. the government sometimes wants to "help" us. but they dont do a very good job. they stopped punishing criminals long ago. the new object of punishment is citizens and cops that defend themselves against rapists and murderers.
What I wonder is how that will apply in practice in the future. Technology is getting to the point where traditional firearms will be well and truly useless against a technologized military. For example, it's not too difficult to imagine automated millimeter-wave radar units that would remotely and silently scan for anything fitting the profile of a firearm, open or concealed, then either destroy the target, or refer to a human decisionmaker at a remote location.
This is technology in development right now. We can only imagine how this will develop into the future.
She makes a very compelling argument. I believe the shooting she lost her parents at was the buffet outside of Kileen, Texas, which is where I was stationed at when it took place in 1990 (or 91)
I understand the point she is trying to make, but she is arguing in favor of something that allowed her own parents to get killed: Possession of an assault rifle.
She still argues in favor or gun ownership. And she makes a very convincing argument, regardless. But assault rifles in the U.S. are one of the main reasons that the drug war in Mexico is so deadly today.
You can argue in favor of their possession till you are blue in the face but they do not make us all safer. Just look at Mexico.
What I wonder is how that will apply in practice in the future. Technology is getting to the point where traditional firearms will be well and truly useless against a technologized military. For example, it's not too difficult to imagine automated millimeter-wave radar units that would remotely and silently scan for anything fitting the profile of a firearm, open or concealed, then either destroy the target, or refer to a human decisionmaker at a remote location.
This is technology in development right now. We can only imagine how this will develop into the future.
She makes a very compelling argument. I believe the shooting she lost her parents at was the buffet outside of Kileen, Texas, which is where I was stationed at when it took place in 1990 (or 91)
I understand the point she is trying to make, but she is arguing in favor of something that allowed her own parents to get killed: Possession of an assault rifle.
She still argues in favor or gun ownership. And she makes a very convincing argument, regardless. But assault rifles in the U.S. are one of the main reasons that the drug war in Mexico is so deadly today.
You can argue in favor of their possession till you are blue in the face but they do not make us all safer. Just look at Mexico.
The Mexicans are using full-auto firearms not semi-auto firearms for the most part, except maybe handguns. And now they're using grenades, anti-tank weapons, etc.
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.
