Why Allow Gun Ownership?

[Lesh]

1. Hunting

2. Target practice

3. Self defense

Case 1 does not require semi auto magazine fed. Certain cases (bear hunting or wild boar) require a handgun but large caliber revolvers serve that purpose.

2. That makes it a toy. A deadly toy

3. Certainly not a magazine fed semi auto. A shot gun is an excellent weapon for home defense.

 

[Canon Shooter]

Case 1 does not require semi auto magazine fed. Certain cases (bear hunting or wild boar) require a handgun but large caliber revolvers serve that purpose.

Relying on a handgun to take down a bear is foolhardy. It takes a very, very well-placed shot to kill a bear. You wouldn't want to try to kill a brown or grizzly bear with a .357 magnum. I know I've seen someone try...

 

[Oddball]

My rights aren't subject to your feelings, loser.

 

[TNHarley]

GFY statist POS
Quit being so scared of an inanimate object. I mean, seriously. My gawd, you mentally ill scum..

 

[Oddball]

 

[johngaltshrugged]

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
Defense from the tyranny of a powerful govt or any other force is the main purpose.
Home defense is one aspect but defense of rights is the main reason we have the 2A.
They don't teach you kids much do they?

 

[BoSoxGal]

Relying on a handgun to take down a bear is foolhardy. It takes a very, very well-placed shot to kill a bear. You wouldn't want to try to kill a brown or grizzly bear with a .357 magnum. I know I've seen someone try...

Backcountry guides advise not attempting to shoot at bears at all - it’s the least effective way to neutralize a bear attack. Bear spray is what you should be carrying - two cans, in case a very pissed off bear finds you again before you get to safety.

Most people think they are a much better shot than they actually would be in a crisis situation. Even police who practice routinely often struggle in crisis settings. This is why all the ideas about arming teachers and other civilians as a means of defense against suicidal mass shooters is insanity.

Nobody but military and law enforcement need to have ownership or possession of assault firearms and large capacity magazines. All the arguments to the contrary are specious.

 

[martybegan]

1. Hunting

2. Target practice

3. Self defense

Case 1 does not require semi auto magazine fed. Certain cases (bear hunting or wild boar) require a handgun but large caliber revolvers serve that purpose.

2. That makes it a toy. A deadly toy

3. Certainly not a magazine fed semi auto. A shot gun is an excellent weapon for home defense.

And yet in NYC to simply keep a revolver in your house or apartment takes 3-6 months of waiting and over $500 in fees.

As long as laws like this are on the books, anything your side says is useless.

 

[martybegan]

Backcountry guides advise not attempting to shoot at bears at all - it’s the least effective way to neutralize a bear attack. Bear spray is what you should be carrying - two cans, in case a very pissed off bear finds you again before you get to safety.

Most people think they are a much better shot than they actually would be in a crisis situation. Even police who practice routinely often struggle in crisis settings. This is why all the ideas about arming teachers and other civilians as a means of defense against suicidal mass shooters is insanity.

Nobody but military and law enforcement need to have ownership or possession of assault firearms and large capacity magazines. All the arguments to the contrary are specious.

So you can guarantee a home invader will not be carrying semi auto handguns or rifles?

 

[TNHarley]

Backcountry guides advise not attempting to shoot at bears at all - it’s the least effective way to neutralize a bear attack. Bear spray is what you should be carrying - two cans, in case a very pissed off bear finds you again before you get to safety.

Most people think they are a much better shot than they actually would be in a crisis situation. Even police who practice routinely often struggle in crisis settings. This is why all the ideas about arming teachers and other civilians as a means of defense against suicidal mass shooters is insanity.

Nobody but military and law enforcement need to have ownership or possession of assault firearms and large capacity magazines. All the arguments to the contrary are specious.

Only race car drivers need vehicles that go over 70mph.
Only families the size of the duggars need 2 houses

 

[BlindBoo]

Defense from the tyranny of a powerful govt or any other force is the main purpose.

Bullshit. It was for the defense of the Nation against the worlds superpowers and the natives. The Militia referenced was the one set up by Congress for defense, not bands of Conspiracy theorists.

 

[PinktheFloyd88]

Why Allow Gun Ownership?​

Because our country is sick in the head.

 

[gipper]

1. Hunting

2. Target practice

3. Self defense

Case 1 does not require semi auto magazine fed. Certain cases (bear hunting or wild boar) require a handgun but large caliber revolvers serve that purpose.

2. That makes it a toy. A deadly toy

3. Certainly not a magazine fed semi auto. A shot gun is an excellent weapon for home defense.

Blaming the gun for mass shootings, is akin to failing to see the forest for the trees.

 

[Canon Shooter]

Backcountry guides advise not attempting to shoot at bears at all - it’s the least effective way to neutralize a bear attack. Bear spray is what you should be carrying - two cans, in case a very pissed off bear finds you again before you get to safety.

I absolutely agree with that...

Most people think they are a much better shot than they actually would be in a crisis situation. Even police who practice routinely often struggle in crisis settings.

This is true.

I go to the range two or three times a week. I'm obscenely proficient with a handgun, and I'm neither a teacher nor a cop. I once had the need to use my firearm in self defense. Three of the four rounds I fired found their mark (the fourth lodged in a wall).

That some people struggle with proficiency is a poor argument for insisting that no one be armed...

This is why all the ideas about arming teachers and other civilians as a means of defense against suicidal mass shooters is insanity.

I strongly disagree.

Is it more insane to allow a teacher to be armed if that teacher wants to be armed, or to allow a suicidal shooter to slaughter our children unabated?

Which of those two choices is more insane?

Nobody but military and law enforcement need to have ownership or possession of assault firearms and large capacity magazines. All the arguments to the contrary are specious.

Well, it would appear as though the police took their sweet-ass time engaging the Texas shooter. Is it really so far out of the realm of possibility for you that an armed teacher couldn't have, at the very least, slowed the shooter down?

 

[gipper]

Why Allow Gun Ownership?​

Because our country is sick in the head.

Yes we mustn‘t allow 99.8% of gun owners who never commit a gun crime to have guns.

You may friend are a serf or a subject, whichever you prefer.

"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."

 

[LordBrownTrout]

1. Hunting

2. Target practice

3. Self defense

Case 1 does not require semi auto magazine fed. Certain cases (bear hunting or wild boar) require a handgun but large caliber revolvers serve that purpose.

2. That makes it a toy. A deadly toy

3. Certainly not a magazine fed semi auto. A shot gun is an excellent weapon for home defense.

I'll use whatever means I choose to defend my family or myself.

 

[Orangecat]

3. Certainly not a magazine fed semi auto. A shot gun is an excellent weapon for home defense.

It sounds like you should get yourself a shotgun, kid. Now step aside and let other adults make their choices.

 

[BrokeLoser]

Nobody but military and law enforcement need to have ownership or possession of assault firearms and large capacity magazines. All the arguments to the contrary are specious.

Is that what the framers said?

 

[AMart]

It's for defending oneself from a corrupt and criminal government and from a foreign invasion/military. "Civilians" should have the same weapons as the military.

 

[Canon Shooter]

And yet in NYC to simply keep a revolver in your house or apartment takes 3-6 months of waiting and over $500 in fees.

As long as laws like this are on the books, anything your side says is useless.

Back in the 70's, my Dad applied for his concealed carry permit. He drove a tanker for Exxon and it was the height of the gas crisis. Hijackings of 8,000 gallon gasoline trucks were not unheard of.

We weren't in the city, but on Long Island. Even still, it took about eight months for my Dad, who was a former New York State Trooper, to get approved...