Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

ladypanther

Ban weapons of mass destruction.....NOW

613 posts in this topic

Men who feel the need to have/shoot big guns are obviously over compensating for bb gun they've been packing since birth.

Gotta love it....use the old folk tale invented by non-masculine men to try and deflect the truth. Nice job.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Regardless of what you think the 2nd amendment says it became arcane and obsolete after the Civil War when power both politically and militarily were shifted away from individual free states and consolidated to the federal government.

The entire purpose of it was the protection of state rights and balance of power. That mirage was destroyed at Appomattox Courthouse.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Regardless of what you think the 2nd amendment says it became arcane and obsolete after the Civil War when power both politically and militarily were shifted away from individual free states and consolidated to the federal government.

The entire purpose of it was the protection of state rights and balance of power. That mirage was destroyed at Appomattox Courthouse.

My solution to this issue goes back to that time a bit.

Want to ban certain types of weapons, feel free.

At a state level.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

pew pew pew

I am just screwing with you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

why do those guys have smallpox?

Government test subjects.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In 1982 21000 people died in alcohol related crashes.

Perhaps we could reduce gun violence by half as well with more laws, regulations,and awareness.

Great example!

Yes it is a great example. Odly enough not in the way you meant it though. We were able to reduce alcohol related crashes by punishing BEHAVIOR not by restricting access to alcohol. This is the same way to reduce violent crime.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes it is a great example. Odly enough not in the way you meant it though. We were able to reduce alcohol related crashes by punishing BEHAVIOR not by restricting access to alcohol. This is the same way to reduce violent crime.

So things like raising the drinking age by three years aren't restricting access I guess.

Here we go making up poo again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not the one defying logic. My position is data based. And it is one I have held for a long time.

The shooter in Conn was not a criminal...he had no record before the killings. He did have access to legal weapons of mass destruction. Without that access...maybe a few more kids and maybe a teacher would be alive today.

I read a while back about a guy who snapped while he was driving in SF and plowed through many school children crossing the street.

He had no criminal record. No driving infractions. No history of mental illness. He just snapped one day and used the weapon he had at his disposal, a Buick, to kill several people.

It's sad what happened to those kids. It truly is. But sometimes in life poo happens that you can't control.

I've had a brother-in-law murdered by a knife, two very dear friends murdered by guns, and lost my best friend to a drunk driver. Neither alcohol, nor knives, nor guns should be banned in my opinion. And yes, if my daughter was one of the victims I would feel the same way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites