Gun perception...

Jarod

Jarod

Well-known member
Contributor
A friend on Facebook went on a rant yesterday about how the liberals are trying to BAN SODA, and her right to own a GUN but trying to LEGALIZE drugs.

She was aginst all three.


She was really upset when I pointed out that nobody has introduced any legislation to ban soda, or all guns, or legalize all drugs.

She was also unhappy with me when I pointed out the parallels between legal drugs and legal guns. I told her we need common sense regulation relating to drugs and guns and that a more moderate position on both would be helpfull to and allow more freedom for the American People.

Our drug laws are way too strict adn our gun laws are way too lax.
 
NY will ban all guns from people who don't carry a minimum $1,000,000 libability policy (proposed). That is all guns Jarrod.

Second, a ban on any gun is an assault on all rights. That'd be like saying you can ban the use of radio TV and the internet but it doesn't restrict freedom of speech because you still have pens and paper.

And what exactly is 'lax' about our gun laws?
 
Kel-Tec Sub 2000 said:
NY will ban all guns from people who don't carry a minimum $1,000,000 libability policy (proposed). That is all guns Jarrod.

Second, a ban on any gun is an assault on all rights. That'd be like saying you can ban the use of radio TV and the internet but it doesn't restrict freedom of speech because you still have pens and paper.

And what exactly is 'lax' about our gun laws?
Click to expand...

Your claimed NY proposal does not ban ALL GUNS, only those not insured.
The use of Radio and TV is highly regulated.. The internet is becoming highly regulated.
 
I was hoping this was a thread to address the perception issues of the anti-gun crowd.

They (the anti-gun folk) are all worked up to ban "assault" rifles, semi-auto handguns (especially those with high cap. magazines), and other scary guns.

None of them seem concerned about shotguns, which are far more deadly. I have looked for the statistic, but haven't found it. But a few years before the first Gulf War, I saw an article comparing the fatality rates of wounds from 9mm handguns and 12 gauge shotguns. The 9mm was fatal in something like 25% of shootings in which someone was hit. The 12 gauge was fatal somewhere in the neighborhood of 88% of the shootings.

The gun is a tool. The shooter is what makes it dangerous.
 
Jarod said:
Your claimed NY proposal does not ban ALL GUNS, only those not insured.
Click to expand...
That's a outright ban Jarod. There is no other way to view it without being a partisan retard.
The use of Radio and TV is highly regulated.. The internet is becoming highly regulated.
Click to expand...
And there are tens of thousands of laws regulating guns.

So again, what is 'lax' about our laws? Go on, point it out since you made the claim.
 
WinterBorn said:
I was hoping this was a thread to address the perception issues of the anti-gun crowd.

They (the anti-gun folk) are all worked up to ban "assault" rifles, semi-auto handguns (especially those with high cap. magazines), and other scary guns.

None of them seem concerned about shotguns, which are far more deadly. I have looked for the statistic, but haven't found it. But a few years before the first Gulf War, I saw an article comparing the fatality rates of wounds from 9mm handguns and 12 gauge shotguns. The 9mm was fatal in something like 25% of shootings in which someone was hit. The 12 gauge was fatal somewhere in the neighborhood of 88% of the shootings.

The gun is a tool. The shooter is what makes it dangerous.
Click to expand...

A shotgun can be more deadly, but not in mass shooting senarios and is almost useless for street crime. I own a shotgun.
 
Jarod said:
A shotgun can be more deadly, but not in mass shooting senarios and is almost useless for street crime. I own a shotgun.
Click to expand...

Most people killed in Aurora were killed with a shotgun. Charles Whitman sure did fine without 'assault' weapons. So did Cho and the Columbine shooters.
 
Kel-Tec Sub 2000 said:
Most people killed in Aurora were killed with a shotgun. Charles Whitman sure did fine without 'assault' weapons. So did Cho and the Columbine shooters.
Click to expand...

It can happen. Aurora would have been worse if the dude had used his assault rifle.

Semiautomatic shotguns with a large capacity should be banned.
 
Jarod said:
Your claimed NY proposal does not ban ALL GUNS, only those not insured.
The use of Radio and TV is highly regulated.. The internet is becoming highly regulated.
Click to expand...
I realize that most liberals are quite happy with regulating rights guaranteed by the constitution with so many requirements that they can't possibly be exercised, but you're wrong.
 
No rights are absolute. We are not allowed to yell fire in a crowded theater and we cant own nuclear arms.

A convicted felon cant vote. A 17 year old cant vote.

There are so many examples of limits on rights guaranteed by the Constitution. OUr founders supported many of those limitations.
 
Jarod said:
No rights are absolute. We are not allowed to yell fire in a crowded theater and we cant own nuclear arms.

A convicted felon cant vote. A 17 year old cant vote.

There are so many examples of limits on rights guaranteed by the Constitution. OUr founders supported many of those limitations.
Click to expand...
funny how those limitations didn't come to exist until the mid 1900s. didn't know the founders lived that long.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top