What would you do...

Like I said -- when you figure out the difference, let me know. K, sweetie?
Meanwhile. the fact I presented disproves your position.

 

It contradicts it... not disproves it. Learn some English please.

 

I had this exact coversation over 30 years ago or more, before concealed carry, Florida and Texas, and this older guy, and I understood his point, he was pretty much stove up, and recoil sensitive, so his carry days in his opinion, were pretty much over.

His dismal opinion was that concealed carry would soon be abolished, that all firearms would soon be banned, and when England started bans on handguns, the U.S. would follow suit.

Now shall issue concealed carry is almost standard Nationwide, and qualified LE officers both active and Retired have National Reciprocity, only a matter of time before it is expanded to all law abiding citizens.

No, too many people have experienced concealed carry and the need for firearms like the venerable AR platform, to turn back the clock now.

 

Incorrect. It proves your position is factually incorrect. Disproves.
Got that now, sweetie?

 

"The Constitution of most of our states (and of the United States) assert that all power is inherent in the people; that they may exercise it by themselves; that it is their right and duty to be at all times armed."
- Thomas Jefferson, letter to to John Cartwright, 5 June 1824

"The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are laws of such a nature. They disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes.... Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man."
- Thomas Jefferson, Commonplace Book (quoting 18th century criminologist Cesare Beccaria), 1774-1776

"On every occasion [of Constitutional interpretation] let us carry ourselves back to the time when the Constitution was adopted, recollect the spirit manifested in the debates, and instead of trying [to force] what meaning may be squeezed out of the text, or invented against it, [instead let us] conform to the probable one in which it was passed."
- Thomas Jefferson, letter to William Johnson, 12 June 1823

“They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
- Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania, 1759

"To disarm the people...s the most effectual way to enslave them."
- George Mason, referencing advice given to the British Parliament by Pennsylvania governor Sir William Keith, The Debates in the Several State Conventions on the Adooption of the Federal Constitution, June 14, 1788

"I ask who are the militia? They consist now of the whole people, except a few public officers."
- George Mason, Address to the Virginia Ratifying Convention, June 4, 1788

"Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed, as they are in almost every country in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops."
- Noah Webster, An Examination of the Leading Principles of the Federal Constitution, October 10, 1787

"Besides the advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation, the existence of subordinate governments, to which the people are attached, and by which the militia officers are appointed, forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition, more insurmountable than any which a simple government of any form can admit of."
- James Madison, Federalist No. 46, January 29, 1788

That's just a small sampling. More is available with only a rudimentary search.

 

WRONG. To seek to ban defensive tools is to dismiss the right of self-defense.

 

Throwing crockery and using mop handles and broomsticks as clubs, does not count.

 

I don't see how any of this supports your opinions

 

I was not your English teacher but if I had been I would be very disappointed.

 

You say I want to ban self defense weapons.
I say I dont and that I never said such a thing.

You tell me I am wrong by repeating a false claim that I want to ban them?

Umm... ok?

You and TOG need to go back to school.

 

That is why I recommend getting a 9mm...

 

It doesn't.

These guys are the JV back-ups.

 

In that I have a better mastery of the language than you, no doubt.
Your position has no basis in fact; the fact I presented disproves it.
You may disagree - it only means you choose to be wrong.

 

So you don't think you have the right to defend yourself if someone attacks you?

 

Well then, a Glock 17 seems to fit the bill.

 

Wow. Are you SERIOUSLY going to claim there is no right to self-defense?? REALLY??

Start your research with State v. Hull.

 

Clear documentation of the Founders' intent. Not my problem if that is beyond your comprehension.

 

Yeah, right. You tell yourself that if it helps you sleep better at night. Doesn't bother me any.

 

Are my questions invisible?

 

Uh .... only every time

 

Well if you are blind or dyslexic I'll give you that

 

Insults ?
Is that all you have ?

 

More correctly: You have no capacity whatsoever.

 

Not my problem if you are wrong. Founders intent is meaningless

 

Heller