While it's true that there do exist more than some people who shoot themselves accidentally, it's also true that more more than some people hurt themselves on accident. Risky behavior, automobiles, and controlled substances are other ways people hurt themselves, whether intentionally or not. Also Lakhota, if a person injures themselves accidentally with a gun, chances are they're not as responsible as one would think.
I've mixed feelings on this destructive bullet. How will it be used? Who will use it? I don't see why a civilian would need to be armed with such a lethal weapon. Now, that doesn't mean I'm not an ardent defender of gun rights. Things like this made solely to kill instead of maim... don't make much sense to me. If someone attacks me, I'd shoot the person to put him on his back, but it wouldn't be my intent to kill him. This weapon increases the chance of fatality. How much so is a good question. If I wanted to kill a threat, I'd unload my cartridge. But this one bullet becomes like 7-8 bullets that rip through the body. Do we now intend to kill rather than stop, when it comes to personal defense? When do we start using bullets laced with cyanide?
As with all cultures, gun culture isn't perfect, and there will always be unsavory elements at play. I think there needs to be a balance. Should people be allowed to holster a handgun? Yes. Should they be allowed to pack two assault rifles on their backs? I don't believe so. There is a point where one being goes from having an effective deterrent to personal injury, to becoming a lethal force that can kill large groups of people.
I partially agree with tyroneweaver's first post. Guns aren't the problem... but they can be... if their lethality becomes ever greater. Would he be alright with bullets dripping with cyanide? What difference would it make? Guns aren't the problem, correct? With these bullets, the death rate becomes 100% for everyone without an immunity to cyanide.
And I feel there is something rather unsettling about weaponry that's made more and more so to kill. The goal should be to stop someone not increasingly assure death. In my opinion some of Lakhota's concerns are quite valid, and merit further discussion. If these bullets are used militarily, then I have little issue with that. But in the hands of civilians, to be packing such lethal force? Where does it end? And if that shouldn't matter, than stand behind citizens using bullets soaked in poison.
I am a conservative, but I don't feel glee in the thought of adding more killing force to a tool designed to keep me safe. If I wanted to kill my threat, I need only aim and pull the trigger three times. [MENTION=23239]westwall[/MENTION], I don't particularly agree with your post
#23. I feel I can stop someone trying to hurt me and mine with a good gun, and reasonable aim. One, two, maybe three quick pulls of the trigger and he's down. With these bullets, it likely takes just one pull of the trigger to rip through his guts with the lethality of 8 bullets. If lethality is not the matter, would you support using bullets that deliver lethal doses of cyanide instead, to ensure death?
Where do we draw the line on lethality?