Zona
A guy in ariZONA
The point is you have a natural right to defend yourself, you don't have a natural right to steal from somebody else. The government has simply enacted a barrier for law-abiding citizens to defend themselves from criminals thus encroaching on their natural rights.
He has a natural right to defend himself? I think he has a right to defend himself legally. Can he have a bazooka in his shop, or a nuclear missile? If not, why not, going by your logic. As silly as this is, it is following your logic.
THERE ARE GUN LAWS FOR A REASON SIR. Criminals will be criminals. Period.
Again, this is some weird juxtaposition imho. He should be thanked. I wish what he did was legal (if this turns out to be illegal) but he should be prosecuted and hopefully he gets a slap on the wrist.
Agree?
Yes, he has a natural right to defend himself. So you're saying he only has the right to defend himself if the government has given him permission to defend himself? Because that's what gun registration amounts to.
A bazooka or a nuclear missile aren't economical and would likely violate rights of others in the vicinity.
Criminals will be criminals, that we agree with. Why do we want to make it harder for law-abiding citizens to defend themselves from criminals?
That is a cop out. Your logic says he CAN or should be able to have a bazooka or nuclear missile....(how is it they are violating the rights of others in the vicinity and a fully automatic AR15 isn't?..if there is a such thing)
Your logic says he can have ANY gun he wants because its wrong for the government to stop him from defending himself. Where does it end? Can he have a fully armed tank in his back yard? Why not?
Criminals will break the law and do what they want, civilized responsible gun owners will obey the law in their state and get armed legally, so when a shooting occurs, there is no question as to the legality of his weapon.
Agree?