Collateral damage for the cause of liberty.:yawn:
The Heroic Gunslinger Fantasy
- Thread starter CabinetMaker
- Start date
Collateral damage for the cause of liberty.:yawn:
Dan Emanuel
Active member
Just be honest.
There is NO WAY to have the Second Amendment, AND have a nation where nobody ever gets SHOT.
DJ
1.0
I have. I am pointing out that you are misrepresenting what has been said. I have guns and I very much want to keep them.
And you are perfectly okay with doing nothing to prevent shootings. Times change. Guns are designed to kill and they do not seem to be treated with nearly the respect that they were when the second amendment was penned. Maybe its time to examine that a bit more closely and see if there some sort of active prevention that can be accomplished instead of reactive punishing.
Dan Emanuel
Active member
People are misrepresenting their own agenda; they act like they don't want to repeal the Second Amendment, even though they do.
DJ
1.0
elohiym
Well-known member
In the U.S., knives are used to commit murder each year more than rifles and shotguns combined. Knives cause more disabling injuries each year than any other type of hand tool and represent an important source of morbidity and mortality to people of all ages.
elohiym
Well-known member
There are 1190 knife injuries per day requiring an emergency room visit according the study cited above.
Are you paying any attention at all?:help:
elohiym
Well-known member
I own a shotgun. According to FBI 2013 crime statistics, there were 308 murders committed with a shotgun and 1,490 murders committed with a knife or cutting instrument. Why should I be subject to a background check and training requirements in order to own a shotgun but not a knife?
Dan Emanuel
Active member
Not if it means effectively neutering the Second Amendment, correct.
Uh-huh.
Firearms are designed to propel a small piece of metal really fast in a straight line. If a vital part of a human or animal is in its way, then it can kill.
I don't know if this is true or not. Do you have some evidence for this? My guess is that you're right about it, but it's only a guess.
We've been examining the Second Amendment very carefully for over a century now, and we're examining it with greater scrutiny as time goes on. The Supreme Court has very recently weighed in on the issue, concluding that the NRA's interpretation is the correct 1. So we have to decide whether or not we even want the Second Amendment at all, not how to make firearms ownership and use so complicated and aggravating that nobody wants to own 1 anymore.
It's just dishonest to so stridently argue for the Second Amendment with your lips, and against the Second Amendment with your suggested legal changes.
DJ
1.0
Dan Emanuel
Active member
Dan Emanuel
Active member
elohiym
Well-known member
It's irrational at least.
Because to use a knife you must be up close and personal. To use a shotgun you only need be in range of the shot gun.
And automobiles are designed to spin their tires. If the tires touch a road, the car can move.
Washing machines are designed to fill up with water, shake a bit, then pump out the water. If clothes get inside, they could get cleaned.
If your wife or child were shot and killed, would you still feel this way. Think carefully before you answer this question.
whitestone
Well-known member
food,thats the weapon of choice. Once upon a time man could tell satin to go fly a kite and just grow food and animals. Now the farms have been taken away and all the seed is g.m.o. and none of you know how to hunt. Food,when your babies cry from hunger you will bow,,,
Speak for yourself Skippy. :yawn:
elohiym
Well-known member
That's not a sufficient reason.