Gun control - Why punish the law abiding rather than the criminals?

I’m not the slightest bit interested in what a judge said 70 years after Independence. My post is dealing with the events of the time namely the forming of militias.

 

False logic. We have much more lenient ccw laws today and much more mass shootings.

Yes, there are rational solutions, and to deny that is false logic.

 

Why do I have to have auto insurance because other people have wrecks and I don't?

 

Rummels numbers are not disputed. That is why The Atlantic Monthly published them.
It is also probably why you do not challenge his research.

But if you prefer hearing the ugly truth from an historian I am happy to oblige you.

"For many years I have lived in dread of having to answer the Question. Curiously, no one has asked it. ...The Question: What did you know and when did you know it? ...I remained a supporter of the international movement and of the Soviet Union until there was nothing left to support. Now, as everyone knows, in a noble effort to liberate the human race we broke all records for mass slaughter, piling up tens of millions of corpses in less than three quarters of a century.”… Eugene D. Genovese, The Crimes of Communism: What did you know, and when did you know it?" "Dissent" Summer, 1994.

 

Since most of them go to gun free zones not many.

 

And that's why people have guns...

 

Because of the sun position in the sky..

 

No one's forcing you to buy auto insurance.

 

The shootings almost always take place in Gun Free Zones.
Gun Free Zones are irrational, they encourage mass shootings.

 

Yeah, who should I believe you or my own eyes?

 

None had commercial pilots licenses or experience flying 747's. They used BOX CUTTERS to hijack the planes. Your CDL meme is a joke, and Roof is your strawman? OK ... the Tsarnaev brothers are mine. 300+ killed or wounded with a kitchen appliance.

 

And by that you mean nobody is forcing you to own a car?

 

So........following your rationale there should be no amendments to the Constitution.

 

Nope same reason they buy insurance

 

If you need to fancy that someone has claimed that the unprecedented number of firearm fatalities that happen under the permissive gun laws of the US is the only method of committing homicide, you can.

I however, recognize that the overwhelming public support for sensible regulations to make it more difficult for homicidal crackpots to acquire their arsenals is quite reasonable.

 

While not exclusively about sport shooting it does protect it. The second amendment guarantees the right to bear arms for personal defense and to defend ourselves against a tyrannical government.It is also the reason no other super power would consider a war on the ground on US soil because we have a national militia that is about 25% of the population.

 

But that's mostly bull.

The bottomline is some people want a never ending supply of overpowered guns for no reason other than "we want 'em". It's like the average person wanting the "right" to drive around the roads in an Indy race car.

It has nothing really to do with the 2nd Amendment, or anything truly sensible.

 

California has already shown that there was a slippery slope with gun control laws.

California has passed so many gun laws they have run out of gun laws and are now making up gun laws.

$29 for a background check to purchase a $5 box of .22 LR ammunition.

Liberals and especially progressives never think of the consequences when they pass stupid legislation.
Instead if buying one 20 rnd box of 5.56X45mm ammunition it will be purchasing 2,000 rrds of ammunition.


The slippery slope
Are you old enough to remember during the late 60's and early 70's when gay men were just asking for repealing Americas sodomy laws. It's all they were asking for and would never ask for anything else ever again, never.

Look at where we are at today.

Buggery is now legal in the U.S.military and there's a painting on a wall of President Bill Clinton dressed in drag.

 

The majority of which are committed in locations that announce to the public they prohibit the legal carrying of firearms within their property, because those responsible for mass shootings deliberately seek out these locations for their actions. This is done simply because those who intend to commit mass shootings do not wish to encounter armed opposition.

 

For the simple reason that operation of a motor vehicle on a public right of way is not a constitutional right, but rather a privilege granted by government.

 

Theres not an insubstantial number of folks who speak about gun ownership as if it were a crime in-and-of-itself that we simply arent enforcing. They see guns as immoral and seek to enforce their morality on others.

 

Gun control - Why punish the law abiding rather than the criminals?

Because the law abiding are basically sheep.

 

The NRA's idea that every man, woman, and child has to arm themselves with a high powered rifle to defend themselves against everyone else toting high powered rifles in school, church, at concerts, shopping, or wherever, sounds like punishment for the "law abiding" to me.

 

Why make stuff up?

 

They don't think that?

Well how should everyone defend themselves?