FA_Q2
Gold Member
Sort of.
Hypothetical:
You have 100 people living in a small town, and in order to be safe (lets not question why, as this is NOT the topic of the thread) they decide to hand in their firearms.
The only person who refuses to is a man who is known to be dangerous, and is not trusted.
So. Do you a) forcibly remove the guns from that one person in order to make everyone safe, or do you b) give back guns to 99 people to protect themselves from one person?
sorry, no gun control.
if the other 99% want to give up their guns..... that is their right to do so.
and just an fyi..... the most dangerous person is usually the one you would never suspect.
You make that last statement as if it were a proven fact: it isn't. It isn't true and it is not a fact. If it is, then prove it. Where is your empirical evidence of such a 'fact'?
Mass shootings are a good place to start.
They are almost never committed by those that we are suspecting of such behavior. Almost to a tee, those events are done by people no one expects but all know are a little out of place.