A huge victory for gun owners - Page 3

hobo · #21 (**permalink**) 03-11-2007, 07:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Truth-Bringer";p=&quot

"False is the idea of utility that sacrifices a thousand real advantages for one imaginary or trifling inconvenience; that would take fire from men because it burns, and water because one may drown in it; that has no remedy for evils, except destruction. The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are laws of such a nature. They disarm those only who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes. Can it be supposed that those who have the courage to violate the most sacred laws of humanity, the most important of the code, will respect the less important and arbitrary ones, which can be violated with ease and impunity, and which, if strictly obeyed, would put an end to personal liberty--so dear to men, so dear to the enlightened legislator--and subject innocent persons to all the vexations that the guilty alone ought to suffer? 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. They ought to be designated as laws not preventive but fearful of crimes, produced by the tumultuous impression of a few isolated facts, and not by thoughtful consideration of the inconveniences and advantages of a universal decree." - eighteenth-century criminologist Cesare Beccaria

Great quote...let me add a personal anecdote.

I have lived in Indonesia where gun control is strictly enforced. I can tell you the criminals are much braver because of this rule. You, the victim, have no defense or protection. A young, strong criminal has the same big knife to protect himself as the victim has. Normally the criminal pilfers the house while the family sits helplessly on the floor.

Every night when the dogs bark, you never know if it is only someone walking by - or if this is the night when you must face a criminal mano y mano. I long to have my Colt 45 nearby.

Wildbore · #22 (**permalink**) 03-11-2007, 07:53 AM

People already had the right to own rifles and shotguns in the homes in Washington D.C.. If that isn't enough to make someone safe, then I don't see how a handgun is going to help.

I don't expect a dramatic change in the crime statistics. More guns = less crime = doubtful.

BroncoBilly · #23 (**permalink**) 03-11-2007, 10:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wildbore";p=&quot

People already had the right to own rifles and shotguns in the homes in Washington D.C.. If that isn't enough to make someone safe, then I don't see how a handgun is going to help.

I don't expect a dramatic change in the crime statistics. More guns = less crime = doubtful.

Who are you to judge and determine what law abiding citizens should own? Especially as you say, it will change nothing.

Wildbore · #24 (**permalink**) 03-11-2007, 12:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BroncoBilly";p=&quot

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wildbore";p=&quot

People already had the right to own rifles and shotguns in the homes in Washington D.C.. If that isn't enough to make someone safe, then I don't see how a handgun is going to help.

I don't expect a dramatic change in the crime statistics. More guns = less crime = doubtful.

Who are you to judge and determine what law abiding citizens should own? Especially as you say, it will change nothing.

I am not dictating to people what they should own. I am just saying people were already able to own firearms for household defense. If a shotgun wasn't enough, its doubtful a handgun is going to make a massive cuts to the murder rates. People may own them in their household, but will they be safer, I highly doubt it.

Truth-Bringer · #25 (**permalink**) 03-11-2007, 01:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wildbore";p=&quot

I am not dictating to people what they should own.

Yes, you are, since you're voting for people who are dictating to other people what they should own. Please stop deceiving yourself and others.

Wildbore · #26 (**permalink**) 03-11-2007, 02:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Truth-Bringer";p=&quot

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wildbore";p=&quot

I am not dictating to people what they should own.

Yes, you are, since you're voting for people who are dictating to other people what they should own. Please stop deceiving yourself and others.

I have not deceived anyone. I am not American, so I haven't voted in your elections. Either way, ownership rights is not a main concern of mine when I go to the voting booth. So if I did vote for someone who is dictating, its because I was thinking of other issues than ownership rights in the voting booth that day.

I have been told what I can I can't own, so I can relate to those in Washington D.C.. It is not a pleasent experience.

Mack · #27 (**permalink**) 03-11-2007, 06:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DuH2";p=&quot

Sane people are not afraid of law abiding citizens having the means to protect themselves. Sane people do not fear a mere tool.

I can own a cannon..I can own a machinegun....

Gun Clubs and Cannon Clubs all over this nation. So whatever.

Trying to imply racism to defend your anti-constitutional stance towards ALL Americans is cute..and stale.

So you think that a man named Muhammad who donates heavily to say...the Muslim Brotherhood should have the right to own lets say:

1. 50 Calibur Sniper Rifle
2. fully out MP5
3. m4a1 auto carbine
4. full mortar kit
5. RPG's
6. and last but not least...how about a nuclear weapon...

The 2nd amendment says the right to bear arms can't be taken away...the 5 things I mentioned are all arms. So either you support the right to own all of these things or you are being a hypocrite if you make the claim that restricting some forms of arms is unconstitutional.

DuH2 · #28 (**permalink**) 03-11-2007, 08:05 PM

Only the last 2 are completely restricted.

Mortars are similar to Cannon.... hard but if you go through the process you can legally own one.

The remainder are legal in most places and only banned in areas where people are simple...which is often where the people think they are smarter then eveyrone else.

I'm not going to play your racist feticsh becasue unlike you I don't think like that. American are Americans not hyphentated Americans.

apotropoxy · #29 (**permalink**) 03-11-2007, 08:28 PM

The 2nd Amendment places not restrictions on the types of arms milita members may posess. Project the state-of-the-art weponry then to what it is today. Those who hold that the Constitution allows citizenry to bear arms will have to torture their own premise if they then wish to restrict a citizen's right to own RPGs, incendiary phospherous explosives, IEDs and shaped charges.