RE: All Hail the Second Amendment
May 15, 2014 at 9:51 pm
(This post was last modified: May 15, 2014 at 9:58 pm by Chas.)
(May 15, 2014 at 12:07 pm)MindForgedManacle Wrote: If THAT'S your criticism, you are almost certainly being hypocritical. Do you support the right for ANYONE to own ANY type of weapon? I very much doubt that you do, otherwise you should have no problem with people owning operational (and being able to use if they feel endangered) RPGs, grenades, and don't even get me started on the tanks. Why should the government be allowed to keep those out of the use of private hands?
Assuming you don't think we should be allowed to own and use such weaponry, it's obvious why you don't: it's unreasonable. There is clearly a limit to which you can reasonably be said to just be trying to protect yourself. Most especially if the weaponry involved has a clear likelihood (and precedence) of hurting others who are not your apparent aggressor.
Now you are just being silly. No one is saying no laws, no restrictions.
His point was there are laws on the books, and more are proposed, that ban some firearms because of how they look, while other equally or more powerful firearms are OK.
He probably owns what are referred to as "assault weapons", a nonsensical, made-up class of firearms.
(May 15, 2014 at 1:10 pm)Minimalist Wrote: I'm less concerned with machine guns... or even 'criminals' with machine guns than I am with morons with guns, Pap.
Another example.
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/05/15/sc...-hes-dead/
Quote:A South Carolina woman shot and accidentally killed a friend while testing out his bulletproof vest.
Sheriff’s deputies in Anderson County said the victim, 26-year-old Blake Wardell, had been hanging out in a garage with about eight to 10 friends early Wednesday when they decided to try out the Kevlar vest.
Investigators said 18-year-old Taylor Ann Kelly fired a shot at Wardell’s chest but missed the Kevlar.
Offhand, I'd say the vest failed.
No, it didn't. She missed the vest.
(May 15, 2014 at 8:32 pm)KUSA Wrote:(May 15, 2014 at 7:43 pm)Ryantology (╯°◊°)╯︵ ══╬ Wrote: Only people with a demonstrated amount of aptitude after having undergone rigorous training and acquired an operator's license, which must be renewed annually, deserve to use guns for protection.
Quote:so that Jim Bob can have one M4 for every finger he can successfully count.
M4 you say? I'm getting a woody.
As to your requirements I certainly qualify. I have extensive training both military and civilian. I have a license and have had several psychological evaluations for various jobs. Also I have had background checks both for the military and civilian employers.
I have training, have passed background checks by local police, state police, and federal agencies. I have had a security clearance.
Jim Bob likely doesn't have even one M4, as that is an assault rifle.
Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
Science is not a subject, but a method.