Quote:
Originally Posted by MattyC
Seems to me the common denominator here is that there was a gun.
There was one law that wasn't broken. The dad, who gave the gun, purchased it legally. So what if he wasn't able to do that?
At their best, guns are used for:
Hunting: We don't technically NEED to do this anymore. My family are hunters and I love wild meat. If you can't hit it with a one-shot rifle or an arrow, go to the supermarket, you suck anyways.
Hitting inanimate objects: While enjoyable, the right to shoot a target when compared to the crazy amount of tragedies that have happened, I just don't see how this argument can hold up at all. You want the right to walk around with a gun on your hip, someone else has the right to feel safe that not every scond person has a gun on their hip. Rights are only protected insofar as they don't infringe on the rights of others. If you have a gun in any place that's not a gun range or wilderness (ie a community with people), I don't feel safe around you.
At their worst (and most frequent) guns are used for:
Murder.
How is this even an argument anymore?
|
Even the old standby dopey American excuse that the government is taking away guns so they can steamroll over their people is pointless. Does anyone really believe that these gun people could defend themselves against the US military if they really wanted to streamroll them with their guns?