You can still buy fertilizer

I guess we all seem to forget the primary reason for the Second Amendment to our Constitution. It was to make every man responsible for the safety of himself, his family and his country Not the government.

You in a militia?

Probably. By the definition used, I am: I am an able-bodied male of the appropriate age (which varied, but usually 16-40 or similar) and not a member of the armed forces.

In other words.... No
 
No. That is not what I am saying.

However, there is no doubt that many acts of violence are prevented becuase the potential victim had a gun...something they wouldnt have if guns were illegal.

Think about this debate board if this were the case....

A year from now, the second ammendment has been erased from the consitution for 6 months....and no one was grandfathered...so all those wishing to obey the law, gave up their firearms.

A man who didnt give a rats ass about the law walks into a crowded train and starts picking off passengers one by one. One man is shot in the arm, takes the blood and puts it on his face and acts like he is dead. Meanwhile the gunman passes him by and continues to pick off passengers...one by one...killing all in his path and never looking behind him for all are "dead"...

He completes his task and shoots himself.

The survivor is interviewed by the police from his hospital bed and says...

"6 months ago, I always carried a gun and if I had it with me today, most would still be alive."

Would you say the second ammendement was important that one day?

This is serious? I'm not trying to be a dick, but this is one of the most far fetched scenarios I have heard.

Let's put it like this. Which is likely to happen more frequently?

The number of times a scenario like the above happens OR the number of times someone is murdered with a gun? Honestly.

Actually, I have heard that more violent crimes are averted thanks to a gun than innocent lives taken thanks to a gun.

No data....I heard it in passing.

As for my scenario? I was on a train right behind the one when people were shot to death oin the LIRR years ago.

Many of us spoke about how having a gun on us would have helped.

You heard in passing??

Your argument is getting even weaker. You're usually better than this but even you have to admit you've provided an extremely weak argument.
 
So Joe citizen doesn't enjoy skeet, trap, target shooting?. The olympics even include guns. In today's world, the average citizen needs one more than ever to protect his home and family. Or did you miss the crime stats in most major cities?

Skeet and trap shooting are leisure activities, hardly what I would call a need. Certainly not a reason to allow gun ownership over the value of innocent lives.

Right crime stats are bad, hence why we need to do something. You wish to double down on the issue and add more guns to the mix. I argue that we should move in the direction of other countries where gun control is stricter and........crime/violence is lower.

When there is a fire raging, you don't try and douse it with kerosene.

Check out the places in this country that have the stricest gun control, and look what it's done for them. Start with Washington DC. Until you have the same culture, way of living, court systems etc. as other countries, you can't do what they do.

Check out places in the world that have real gun control and look what it's done for them.
 

Forum List

Back
Top