Is the 'right to bear arms' unlimited?

You did.
You said:
Well the law against murder gives people that right...
The right to not be slandered is found in the same place.

 

Crossing shot, sure.
The scenario assumes the shooter set up on the line of approach, for a zero-angle shot.

 

I understand what you're saying, but for many reasons, it would still be very difficult. I've never heard of anyone shooting down a large, modern heavy jet with a rifle, have you?

 

No, but that don't mean it cant be done.
And, of course, the scenario isn't limited to AR10s and M14s

 

Ha, look at the lengths of fantasy these people have to go to in order to have any point to make. "I can take down a jumbo jet with a coffee can and some silly putty, so banning stinger missiles don't make no sense and saying they are banned for being too destructive don't make no sense!" Good grief...

 

Nice pile of straw you have there - much easier beating upon it than trying to actually have a meaningful debate on an issue, eh?

 

Isn't there also a line of sight issue?

 

Now, simple question: should the minimum age be the same for alcohol and guns, and what should the age be for both?

 

Hasn't this been addressed - with a picture, no less?

 

Why should it be?

 

Where might such a set up take place? I thought you were talking about from the ground.

 

You mean like if the shooter is in a straight line with the airliner? Is that what you mean?

 

You've done very well to follow the discussion to know what the argument is!

 

Well no, if it was a straight line then there would be line of sight on the pilots, but I can't see how that could be achieved considering the plane will be above the shooter. How could a straight line be achieved?

 

Age restrictions on anything are hard for me to accept because it’s so subjective. Take child labor laws for example. As a rule of thumb, they solve a big problem from the past. But they do harm individuals in the process.

I’m not saying children shouldn’t be prohibited from certain things, I just feel for the ones harmed by blanket restrictions.

My ideal would be high quality parenting as the default protector of society, not arbitrary age restrictions. Some kids are ready to purchase a firearm well before 18. Some obviously are never mature enough. With alcohol, it’s pretty hard to make an argument that the benefits outweigh the risks at any age.

Eighteen is the compromise I can live with, even if I don’t like the arbitrary, “unfair” effects on individuals.

 

That's right... And you have such courage to take no stance on ot whatsoever! I am truly blessed to be in the presence of such a brave intellectual.

 

What the hell? What makes you think that I have taken no stance on it?

 

On the very specific, esoteric argument i was mocking? Because you stated none. Wait...i guess it is you who jumped in without understanding. On to the thread...

 

Chris, I don't want to discuss the "how" on a forum.

 

I would have thought that it was obvious that I was arguing AGAINST the idea, considering how much I have been scrutinising the person arguing FOR it.

 

See: Red X

 

This was addressed. I gave you a picture.

 

I don't view people from other parts of the world as human waste.

 

Did their mass murder through the police powers of the state.

 

You gave me the picture AFTER I said that!