I can hunt with a spear. People do. And I will be impressed by anyone who kills a deer with one. Why my being impressed by anyone who kills a deer with a pistol shows my ignorance is beyond me. Come back when you've tried it. I assure you, there is a reason you haven't.
...you are a crank. Not a rational person living in America where there is precisely zero threat of foriegn invasion due to nuclear weapons and very friendly relations with it's neighbours. Not to mention an enormous navy, army and airforce that outguns the rest of the world combined. Lame excuse mate. Only a crank would take it seriously. No guns for crankies.
Perhaps there should be a limit on the number of guns that can be purchased each year by one person. I remember hearing several times now that these nuts purchase a lot of guns during the year preceding the attack. That might be a key flag.
Not at all. It's in my psychology too. There is a sensible reason why am I barred from owning certain weapons. A sensible reason we all are.
No, I'm not. But you're off to a very bad start. That is the naive view of someone who doesn't understand how the world works. Your childish rants don't impress. If you don't think an invasion is possible, ask the people living on the Mexican border. Ask all the cops who have been executed. Anyone who ignores history is doomed to repeat it.
My my you can indeed ban rifles with the capability to hold large magazines and who have a fast cycle time. In any case, you do not need at the very least to allow a 19 years old who can not go into a 7/11 store to buy a can of beer but who can go into a gun shop to buy a weapon able to do mass murders of his age mates.
What is the purpose of a car? What is it designed to do? What is the pyschology of a person buying a car most likely to be? Is it A) I want to be able to go places. Or B) I want to be able to kill people. I can use a gun to hammer in nails. Anyone actually buy one for that purpose? No. Not part of the psychological profile of a gun purchase. I could also use it as a fence post. But again not in my mind when I buy it.
Every semi-auto rifles of the last 100 years has a fast cycle time. I agree there can be age limits on purchase.
So now, because you had no idea that handguns do exist for the purpose of deer hunting and can't bring yourself to make this admission, you have chosen to be obtuse. I have hunted with a handgun. In the Allegheny National Forest. I dropped a fine 10 point buck at 70 yards with my father-in-law's .44 magnum. I liked it so much I bought one of my own. I just don't hunt with it because I like my Remington. Your ignorance shows not because you are or aren't impressed but rather the fact you have no idea how commonplace it is, particularly among those who live in a state that prohibits hunting with a rifle.
History such as the Zimmerman WW1 telegram where Germany offer to support and fund any mexico attempts to take back the South West that was taken by the US from Mexico in the 1840s? Mexico comments after the issue became public was that the US military even at that time could handle the Mexican army as if it was children. Given our history both Canada and Mexico have must more reasons to fear an invasion by the US of their nations then the other way around.
Yup, that's the mentality we don't allow guns. You wanted to know. That's it. A shining example of what would flag you up. If you see guns primarily as a means of defence, you aren't allowed one. If on the otherhand your mentality is, I like them. I like to shoot with my buds. I like to control pests, I like to wander around in the countryside pitting my wits and skills against wild animals... no problem. But a dominant thought process that involves conflict with other humans = no gun lisence for you. Failed the mentality test.
There is no reason not to slow down the current cycle time or have designs that limit the size of magazines that would fit those rifles for that matter.
It is not possible to rule out a situation we can't foresee. We could get bogged down in a global conflict leaving the homeland under protected. Electronic warfare might somehow cripple our ability respond or detect invasion. It is a logical fact that the chance of a foreign invasion cannot be ruled out. Maybe it can be today. But unless you have magical powers, it cannot be ruled out in the future. And even now, we are looking down the barrel of a possible civil war.
If you've done it, I'm impressed. I haven't claimed it's impossible. Only impractical compared to the alternatives. I wasn't aware of anywhere that prohibits hunting with a rifle. Let alone one that prohibits hunting with a rifle but allows it with a pistol. Seems like an unlikely law. But if you say so, I don't care enough to disagree with you.
He have a large number of fast changing magazines on his person and in fact you could ban all rifles with fast replacement magazines for that matter and just make the owner load the rifles in a similar manner to the first level actions rifles. Rifles would be limited to say ten rounds more then enough for self defense or target shooting or hunting and then you would need to take the time to feed one round after the other into the weapon. No ability to fast change magazines. There are solutions to this problem that would allow most use for having rifles without allowing them to be mass murder weapons.
What are you talking about as I am not a gun smith but it can not be all that hard to adjusted the links and other components within the rifles to slow down the cycle time of those rifles. Note do we have a gunsmith in the house?