- 18 Nov 2019 14:21
#15049274
If you walk into a gun dealer here in Florida and buy an AR-15, that's not a military grade weapon. It has no selective fire. It's a dressed up ranch rifle and nothing more...
The 2nd Amendment wisely does not specify why a person should own a gun.
There's a famous exchange in which uber-liberal idiot Piers Morgan got flat-out owned on the gun control issue:
My firearms are all insured against theft and, with the exception of the gun I carry and one in a strategic location near my front door, they're all locked up. My desk, where I also keep a loaded firearm, has a fingerprint lock which requires the four fingers of my right hand to open.
Again, no reason to license anything beyond granting a CCW when applied for...
I love when gun-haters like yourself trot out idiot stats like this.
Tasmania is a country of about a 500,000 people. The United States is over 650 times the size of Tasmania. Accordingly, it's silly to believe that because something works there it'll work here. Believing that is silly.
2016 numbers:
Privately owned firearms in Tasmania - 147,000
Privately firearms in the US - 393,000,000
Number of firearms per 100 people in Tasmania - 28
Number of firearms per 100 people in the US - 120
To reiterate, it's just silly to believe that the fact that it works there means that it would work here.
It won't...
Godstud wrote:Yes, @Drlee Having the right to bear arms does not mean you have the right to own unregistered firearms, or that there should not be good gun controls in place to prevent military grade firearms from being in the hands of civilians(especially the mentally ill, or criminals). It does not mean that firearms shouldn't be regulated, either.
If you walk into a gun dealer here in Florida and buy an AR-15, that's not a military grade weapon. It has no selective fire. It's a dressed up ranch rifle and nothing more...
A right to bear arms does not mean that you should have more than firearms used for personal defense or hunting weapons. i.e. revolvers, shotguns and hunting rifles. The 2nd Amendment is not specific on types of guns, although if it were updated, it should.
The 2nd Amendment wisely does not specify why a person should own a gun.
There's a famous exchange in which uber-liberal idiot Piers Morgan got flat-out owned on the gun control issue:
It would be, I think, reasonable for Americans to have to have their weapons insured, against theft or misuse, as well as being licensed in safe use and storage of said firearms.
My firearms are all insured against theft and, with the exception of the gun I carry and one in a strategic location near my front door, they're all locked up. My desk, where I also keep a loaded firearm, has a fingerprint lock which requires the four fingers of my right hand to open.
Again, no reason to license anything beyond granting a CCW when applied for...
Direct example of gun control - After the Port Arthur shooting in Australia(Tazmania) in 1996, they banned certain firearms, and since then they have not had a similar incident. It worked, in short.
I love when gun-haters like yourself trot out idiot stats like this.
Tasmania is a country of about a 500,000 people. The United States is over 650 times the size of Tasmania. Accordingly, it's silly to believe that because something works there it'll work here. Believing that is silly.
2016 numbers:
Privately owned firearms in Tasmania - 147,000
Privately firearms in the US - 393,000,000
Number of firearms per 100 people in Tasmania - 28
Number of firearms per 100 people in the US - 120
To reiterate, it's just silly to believe that the fact that it works there means that it would work here.
It won't...
Courage is knowing that something will hurt and doing it anyway. Stupidity is the same thing. That's why life is hard...