hog88
Your ray of sunshine
- Joined
- Sep 30, 2008
- Messages
- 122,126
- Likes
- 181,314
The FF also only believed that landowners should have the right to vote, recognized no women's rights, and had no issue with slavery. You good with all those beliefs?
And yet we have not seen a rise since constitutional carry came out. In fact within weeks in Indiana it was saving lives at that mall shooting.Apples to oranges comparison. And you actually think arming more people will create less gun violence? That seems completely counter-intuitive to me.
wait are you saying you are not OK with the rights we have?The FF also only believed that landowners should have the right to vote, recognized no women's rights, and had no issue with slavery. You good with all those beliefs?
THat's why they hide that pretty 'lil red button from Mindless Joe.No one (at least not me) is asking you to give up what you already have or your right to purchase and own a firearm.
I'm just trying to keep nukes and anti-aircraft weaponry out of the hands of the people who would use them for mass destruction.
Its regulated and controlled by the people who have the nukes. And it makes sure those with the nukes keep them, and no one else gets them to threaten those with nukes.
And so far, it's only been our rational and reasonable country that has nuked someone else, and it was someone without nukes or even the threat of nukes that got hit, while the extremists are 0'fer. You can understand why countries not armed with nukes are leery of those who are armed with nukes.
That same nation that has nuked someone else is also the ones telling us to disarm from our guns. The same nation with a very long and active list of maltreating, to put it lightly, groups they have disarmed.
Well, the price point probably does that on its own. Actually, a fair number of people own firearms that at one time have been classed as or used as anti-aircraft weapons (ex: .50 BMG M-2, the mighty Ma Deuce) and, as can be expected, they have not been used for any nefarious reasons.No one (at least not me) is asking you to give up what you already have or your right to purchase and own a firearm.
I'm just trying to keep nukes and anti-aircraft weaponry out of the hands of the people who would use them for mass destruction.
That's because they are not easily available.Well, the price point probably does that on its own. Actually, a fair number of people own firearms that at one time have been classed as or used as anti-aircraft weapons (ex: .50 BMG M-2, the mighty Ma Deuce) and, as can be expected, they have not been used for any nefarious reasons.
