So how is it that legal gun ownership could allow your 15 year old to buy a hand gun from a K-Mart?
If the gun was purchased legally and stolen that is possible.
But if legal purchasing of firearms was prohibited you don’t think that firearms wouldn’t make their way into the country regardless of the law and your 15 year old still wouldn’t be able to buy a hand gun from a K-Mart?
Do you see where your logic is extremely flawed?
Even though we have immigration laws people are still smuggled into the country daily.
I worked on the San Diego border for 16 months and am very familiar with the amount of drug and human trafficking.
I don’t imagine a scenario where I can pull out my .45 and shoot someone.
I consider a scenario in which potential perpetrators are discouraged from ever trying something stupid because the sheer number of people who can pull out their hand guns and stop them.
Security systems help detour criminal activity when a criminal knows there is a security system.
The same goes for homeowners who will defend themselves and their property.
You said you had military experience?
If you’re intention is to hurt someone or cause chaos don’t you pick the softest targets?
Why do you think schools get shot by people with death wishes? They are soft targets.
My firearms don’t give me a false sense of security. The training I have received gives me some comfort that I know if needed, I can use the tools that I have to potentially protect myself or more importantly my family. Some comfort isn’t perfect comfort, but I’m sure you’ll try to spin it.
This is why so many reasonable people hate our liberal gun ownership laws. They are not common sense.
I agree with the words, but not the context.
The over bearing restrictions enforced on us by liberals are not commonsense or in harmony with our Constitution.
And you are the one who is delusional if you think my ability to legally purchase a firearm is the direct reason that your 15 year old could theoretically illegally buy a hand gun from K-Mart.
Have you never paid attention to Russia and how they will sell weapons to anyone and everyone while the black market still makes its way to the US?
OK so you have military experience and know how to handle firearms. Many of us do. The issue for those who govern us is whether that fact should dominate policy applying to the general population.
I said many times earlier in this thread that I don’t believe that the laws should be changed for the present generation of Americans. I feel this way not because this generation is competent to handle firearms but because there are so many of them who feel passionately about their gun toys and have convinced themselves that they need them for home defence. Any attempt to forcibly deprive such people from their precious weapons would be disastrous, both for the gun nuts and for the government that attempted it.
I have also said several times that better laws should not have to fix every possible avenue for guns to get into the hands of irresponsible people. I actually agree with you that many people who want guns but should not have them would find a way to get them, and that cannot be stopped in a fully effective manner by laws.
Our difference is that I believe that our government should develop a strategy to address the problem over a long period so that the risk is reduced for future generations. New laws may be part of the solution at certain stages, but I would not rule out some sort of social engineering program. A similar strategy has worked for smoking and is still underway for drugs. We have convinced many young people that smoking is just plain stupid and highly uncool. Perhaps a strategy would be successful that made fun of American gun nuts as being inadequate, little dick, kind of people who compensate for their lack of importance in the world by toying with powerful weapons. These people are no doubt too stupid to take such a campaign seriously themselves but that is OK. I have given up on them. The strategy would make them look small to their children and loved ones.
A similar thing took place as the American west was settled and came under the rule of law in the 19th century. No doubt many former civil war soldiers and cowboy tough guys wanted to keep wearing a pistol in a holster around town, but their communities, very sensibly, would not put up with that. Common sense told the town folks that they would not be safer in the long run if everyone wore a gun. No, it was better to hire a strong sheriff and back him up when he needed help with gun happy visitors.
Why could we not repeat this strategy during this century?
Welcome! OmniNerd's content is generated by nerds like you. Learn more.