Quote:
|
Originally Posted by toonpornblog
Your statements are quite strange; first inferring that since they came from criminials (..they must be criminals), and "GUNS ARE BAD" are from two different sides of the coin, usually.
The fact that there were fewer people 150 years ago, and the fact that 'if you didn't learn to protect yourself have your shit stolen, and/or die' lends to a bit more credibility of the days of past. However, there are several laws in place that make it difficult to obtain several weapons (not impossible, of course), and yes, you can still buy a 22 that will put a hole in something. So will anything abused or used improperly.
Basically, I guess I'm saying that if you're trying to make a point beyond personal statements and conjecture, you've failed to do so.
|
Basically I can't help if you are obtuse. Yes ther were fewer people and more deaths buy guns. Hmmmmm.
Show me in the constitution were it says the government can restrict which type of guns you own. This is where the gun lovers logic fails. They think the 2nd Admendment means it's carte blanche on owning a gun. well it's not.
First of all the 2nd Admendment says the right to bear ARMS, not guns. Are guns arms? Sure, so are grenade launchers, tanks and nuclear missles. You can't own those can you? Using the gun lovers logic those thing should also be available to everyone. After all it says my right to bear ARMS shall NOT be INFRINGED. Well isn't that what they are doing by denying me my right to own a tank? A tank is ARMS and I'm being infringed from owning one. See the fact is the while you have a right to own arms, we have had over 200 years of precedent that also says the government can tell you which arms you can and can't own because that's exactly what they have been doing for that long. So any gunlover that says gun laws are un-Constitutional are in fact full of shit because if they were they would have been overturned 200 years ago.