Quote:
Originally Posted by notinmybackyard
The point of the matter is that it's the right of private citizens in a time of need to organize themselves into an armed force.
It can be the aftermath of a natural disaster, riots, etc.
We have the right to use our weapons (guns) to defend lives and property.
|
Nobody has proposed or attempted to propose that you will not have that right.
I have plenty of guns in my home. All for protection of life and property.
I don't need to carry a Ar15 into the local walmart or bar. If I must fear that others will and might use them, I will no go there. Great for commerce isn't it.
Some folks answer seems to be everyone should and must carry one for protection that you would not need if there were protections of the wrong folks getting them who might use them in the wrong way. Since nobody can make a test for that to execute, why allow it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by notinmybackyard
On that note... The police tend to only show up AFTER a crime has been committed. So I'm sorry but if someone breaks into my home in the middle of the night I'm going to put several bullets into them and then take my chances with the legal system.
|
If you would spend more time and effort trying to fix that one issue within your locality, you might be much further ahead. And all of us would be safer with less guns.
It is a area you actually can make progress but nobody has tried as hard as they have with more guns everywhere type policy.
News flash, more guns everywhere is making it worse, not better.
Find a way to insure what I mentioned above and I can become a believer.
But No action, just talk is all I see. It gets worse.
When it gets bad enough, they will be coming for all of our guns like you fear in the first place. Something I do not want to see but many are insuring that is the path taken in the end.
It's not the theory I have issue with, it's the effect of the actual practice that is the issue.
Something needs to change, but it's not. just lip service.