Gun Control: Criminals with Guns

Untrue, the Girandoni Air Rifle ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-pqFyKh-rUI ) was invented in the late 18th century, held about 30 rounds and reloaded at the push of a button. Meet the real reason Lewis and Clark were unmolested by the Indians during their travels in the West.

 

He seems like a statist due to his support for making handgun and semi-auto rifles illegal, but there is legitimately a point where the question "why?" goes unanswered, and it comes down to a value call. Maybe you guys have reached that level of disagreement?

 

many of the opponents of gun control desire to see guns taken away from legitimate owners. Regardless that they close their eyes to the real criminals and declare the lawful owners criminals, they are always stating their personal view is the only answer for everyone. They are deceptive when they say something as idiotic "we only want one or two guns." They are in fact after the whole amendment.
They also believe that taking way the 2ndA that the criminals will just simply turn their guns in, or the believe that the 4thA be suspended to door-to-door warrantless searches to confiscate any weapon they find.
The harsh reality of all this is that more criminals own guns in the US than any other industrialized nation. By whatever means they have, they will always have guns.
Australia did not have problems with common criminals and guns because the criminals didn't have many to begin with, unlike the US. They will not give them up quietly. We also deal with the criminal element from Mexico (which our AG armed) and their drug trafficking.
Naw, I'd just as soon keep mine.......

 

I'm not saying our values aren't aesthetically pleasing or are wrong in any way - as a shooter, I would prefer it if all guns were completely legal and unregulated for ownership, carry, manufacture, and sale. So much so that the government doesn't even have knowledge a trade has taken place. No background checks, no serial numbers on guns, no gun registry, no limits on full-auto rifles, rocket-propelled grenades, field artillery, functional tanks, Phalanx CIWS's, explosives like ANFO, thermite, dynamite, guided missiles; even chemical agents like VX, sarin, chlorine, mustard gas; biological weapons, dirty bombs, and nuclear bombs: the whole spectrum!

So I'm pretty confident in my values. But it's still the case that others might not share these values. I do not buy all that natural rights stuff, that's not where I'm coming from, though I value many of the same things. If we've reached irreparable disagreement over value calls - there's no additional discussion which can resolve our dispute.

 

I am claiming The Federalist Papers outline the federal doctrine. Our Founding Fathers were wise enough to include their reasoning.

 

If the US Feds implemented Australia-style gun control - some would resist, but it would be a relatively smooth process. Those individuals who resist would be painted as terrorists and vilified in the media.

There is nothing that you or anyone else can do. It's coming; you've got 20-40 years of relative liberty remaining, before you get a dose of Australian gun control.

[hr][/hr]

In my eyes a legitimate owner is anyone who hasn't initiated force with their weapon, or indicated imminent intent to do so. I only support in any way interfering with gun ownership, carry, manufacture, or sale where the state has met this burden to a strong standard of evidence, through normal investigative work. I support no regulation, restriction or taxation on any individual before this burden has been met.

In effect this makes all gun sales legal and unregulated.