No, I'm was referring to the no snitch policy that allows criminals to go free. What is it you don't understand? No wait, you live in liberal fantasy land.
We have a small group of off roaders and we live in a great area to do it. We also have to renew our license, register, insure, have inspected yearly, pay excise tax on, and maintain according to very tight regulations. Yet, having to do all this to our cars and trucks has not inhibited us one bit from driving off road and has not kept one guy from racing. He loved it so much, he became a professional, retired and now does commentary for the broadcasts of major races on the race circuit. It's funny how some think that registering their guns like , a car and needing a permit, like a license will destroy their lives and their shooting enjoyment. Hmmmmmm. I don't see the logic.
Sure, hammers are designed to strike the head of a nail while guns are primarily designed to kill and maim.
No, actually the weapon is designed to hit a target. The bullet has the terminal effects. I thought Spider Man would know that?
CERTAIN guns are made for self defense, others are made primarily for target practice (like ruger 10/22s) and competition. Guns in the right hands can be used for many things besides killing. Besides that term is vague. Is it wrong to kill a would be rapist, murderer, mauler, terrorist, animal for food, or animal that is attacking you?
Nope, that's what actually happens. But (gasp) Spidey doesn't know this? You who have qualified in more weapon systems than most of us could dream of? Do tell.
It's ok to use it against anyone attempting to kill you; hunting or animal attacking you (that can inflict serious or fatal wounds). No go on rapists or terrorists who are not attempting to kill you.
So do you promise that if I register my guns that you won't take them if Hillary appoints a liberal justice and the Heller decision gets overturned? We don't trust our government enough to give in to registration. We don't trust that our country won't become more liberal and anti 2A in future generations and threaten our children and grandchildren's right to keep and bear arms. This is not about today's political climate.. This is about an unknown future. No one can predict the future so people need to stop acting like they can.
Ever heard of a carry permit? I can use a car or a gun on private property all I want, but if I want to do it in public I need a license. If there weren't very vocal groups advocating against me then I wouldn't care much. Also it's interesting to see what your test for this sort of law is. If requiring a person to get permission to exercise their right doesn't destroy their life or immediately destroy their ability to exercise that right to some extent then it's not a bad idea. I know you don't like guns so applying this sort of thought to other rights that you DO exercise might help. I'm sure you read books and news occasionally. Well I think that a license should be required to access books and other media because we need to make sure that a person isn't some sort of lunatic or extremist who will violently respond to certain ideas or events, or possibly adopt ideas that I deem to be dangerous. A license for that wouldn't ruin your life or prevent you from reading certain books (as long as I approve them) so clearly there's nothing wrong with it. Another good license opportunity is the fourth amendment. If you don't want the police in your house then surely you're up to no good, right? Let's require a license for anyone who wants to be exempt from warrantless searches. The application will involve a background check and quick home search, and the license will require renewal every five years, along with a new background check and home search. Sound good?
I guarantee, that no matter what happens, you guys who don't have criminal records and a history of mental and spousal abuse problems, will be able to keep your guns.
You are lying. You can't predict what will happen in future generations. You can't guarantee squat. How arrogant of you to speak for all anti gun folks, now and in the future.
Part of the Banoid movement spends much of its time trying to pretend that bans are not the goal of the banoid movement. other parts of that movement proposes the most extreme idiocy possible (we had a banned Banoid on another forum claim that you should only be able to buy 50 rounds of ammo per year-no matter how many guns you owned) so the still odious crap of other banoids looks "reasonable" since i have NEVER seen a gun restrictionist draw a line in the sand and start opposing the scheme of the Banoid movement, its fair to say they all really support banning. after all, once you have decided that laws that target honest gun owners will reduce some crime, and the rights of honest gun owners must play a subordinate priority to "public safety" you have already made all the decisions needed to support gun bans
I'm quite sure that in your lifetime and within your profession, you've see more than a few of the weak minded (read liberals) that repeat the lie so much they begin to believe the lie. Self delusion is a necessary trait for a liberal or otherwise his/her brain ( such as it is ) would explode.
Yes I am now well educated to your thought process, but how is it that those millions of guns aren't killing millions of people if that is all they were designed for?
