It always works out that way. Registration leads to confiscation.

Again, guns are not the public threat. Swords are not the public menace. Guns and swords do not kill people, It is people that kill people.

A case in point was 911 where those terrorists only had box cutters. The public threat is really the murderous intent of the criminal.

Yes. But, as the classic reply goes, the guns help.

My, that's a drastic statement. What about the gun control we have here? Do you think guns will ever be banned here? I don't. I think there should be a limited amount of gun control, and I don't want to be disarmed.

Anyway, what do think no control leads to? There has to be some middle ground.

And just where is "here".

What do you consider "middle ground" when it comes to your rights? Would you seriously consider finding "middle ground" on any of your other rights?

If a gang crashed into your house, would you prefer to have the means to self defense or would you prefer not too?

The terrorists only needed box cutters.

America.
We're not talking about my other rights. It's the right of law abiding citizens to have the reasonable means to defend themselves. Reasonable means does not = an assault rifle, for example. I mean, you don't need that. But you do need to be able to defend yourself, it's not a friendly world out there.

Of course I would. I'd just prefer that it would be harder for criminals like them to get to the same means. There's your middle ground. Does that sound unreasonable?

So, what's your solution, Sixgun? Root out the evildoers?

When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns.


You probably read that bumber sticker before. It's got alot of truth to it as laws against guns will only disarm the law abiding population.

There is no "solution", the world is what it is. There is only vigilance.

Don't need an assault rifle?

You know that one of the reasons that the founding fathers gave us the 2nd Amendment was so that the people could overthrow a tyranny that might someday come out of our own government?

You got to remember that these guys did fight a bloody revolution. They had to overthrow the previous government so as to create a better government. Thats how they became our founding fathers.

Anyway, Mao was right about power coming out of the barrel of a gun. Yes, there are checks and balances built into our government. But that we are an armed people is the final check and balance to government.

Swift_epiphany. Can you define an assault rifle for me? Can you explain how the guns banned under the "Assault Weapon Ban" are assault weapons? (hint, they don't meet the technical or historical definition). Can you explain how the features used to define an assault weapon make the guns so much more dangerous? (hint, they don't, they are largely appearance or ergonomic issues only).

Did you know its already ILLEGAL under federal law for convicted criminals, drug users, and the mentally ill to possess firearms? And that its a lifetime ban?

Its already IMPOSSIBLE for criminals to get the guns legally. Guess what, they BREAK the law. Actually, they BREAK LOTS of laws when they do so.
Further restrictions on innocent people doesn't prevent the bad guys from breaking the law.

Yeah, that's what I said.

OK,

I must have missed that part.

Guns are really only a public threat in the hands of dictatorships, although Rwanda has shown how machetes can still be used that way as well. Gun misuse by criminals is negligible by comparison, when one looks at the entire planet.