Horrific Newtown, CT school shooting

[joeydb]

Originally Posted by Dahoss

As I figured.

You are absolutely right my opinion is irrelevant, much like your posts. Which is why I am looking for an answer from you or anyone as to why people should be able to own these type of weapons.

Of what purpose does it serve to own a weapon like this? Because if the answer is none...then why are they legal?

That is my point, which I know you are aware of. Are you really this bored? Wouldn't it be nice to have a discussion where actual points of view are shared instead of just talking around what people say?

Everything is legal that is not expressly prohibited.

A purpose is not necessary at all. Like pet rocks and wallpaper.

But most gun owners do have one or more purposes. Most popular are self defense, home defense, target shooting (they do have automatic rifle competitions for that), just having fun with it at shooting range...

I guess here is the discriminator - guns, even automatic rifles, can be used for sport, hobbies and defensively. That would not be true of explosives, which are rightly banned outside of industry and the military, or other more destructive weaponry.

Where we disagree is, I think you're saying "Ban it unless there is a purpose to allow it." I'm saying "Allow it unless there is a reason to ban it." It sounds like a subtle difference but it's not.

[Dahoss]

You shouldn't think. You might hurt yourself.

I think my point of view is pretty easy to understand. You might not agree but I am not for banning things that serve no purpose. I am for banning things that we should not have because it poses safety risks.

Things like military assault rifles. Not pet rocks.

[joeydb]

Originally Posted by Dahoss

You shouldn't think. You might hurt yourself.

Spoken like a true intellectual, with manners no less.

[Dahoss]

Originally Posted by joeydb

Spoken like a true intellectual, with manners no less.

It's hard to be well mannered when you act like the conservative version of Riot talking around points and ignoring the ones that prove you wrong.

[NTamm1215]

I have heard people say that they think restricting what types of guns people can purchase is a slippery slope that will lead to the destruction of certain rights. I disagree. The 2nd amendment is arguably open to more interpretation than any other amendment because the original intent is virtually inapplicable by modern standards. The "right to keep and bear arms" had everything to do with defending oneself from the government and/or his/her fellow man when they felt like their rights were being violated. The idea that people can stockpile assault rifles because of the 2nd amendment seems very silly to me. Restricting what types of guns can be made for legal purchase is constitutional.

[bigrun]

Originally Posted by NTamm1215

I have heard people say that they think restricting what types of guns people can purchase is a slippery slope that will lead to the destruction of certain rights. I disagree. The 2nd amendment is arguably open to more interpretation than any other amendment because the original intent is virtually inapplicable by modern standards. The "right to keep and bear arms" had everything to do with defending oneself from the government and/or his/her fellow man when they felt like their rights were being violated. The idea that people can stockpile assault rifles because of the 2nd amendment seems very silly to me. Restricting what types of guns can be made for legal purchase is constitutional.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by NTamm1215

I have heard people say that they think restricting what types of guns people can purchase is a slippery slope that will lead to the destruction of certain rights. I disagree. The 2nd amendment is arguably open to more interpretation than any other amendment because the original intent is virtually inapplicable by modern standards. The "right to keep and bear arms" had everything to do with defending oneself from the government and/or his/her fellow man when they felt like their rights were being violated. The idea that people can stockpile assault rifles because of the 2nd amendment seems very silly to me. Restricting what types of guns can be made for legal purchase is constitutional.

I agree. We are already limited to what we can or cannot own. We didnt slide down any slippery slope when the assault ban was in force before.

[Rupert Pupkin]

"As a teenager, Adam Lanza would come in for a haircut about every six weeks without speaking or looking at anyone and always accompanied by his mother."

http://news.yahoo.com/stylists-lanza...215310243.html

[jms62]

Originally Posted by joeydb

Everything is legal that is not expressly prohibited.

A purpose is not necessary at all. Like pet rocks and wallpaper.

But most gun owners do have one or more purposes. Most popular are self defense, home defense, target shooting (they do have automatic rifle competitions for that), just having fun with it at shooting range...

I guess here is the discriminator - guns, even automatic rifles, can be used for sport, hobbies and defensively. That would not be true of explosives, which are rightly banned outside of industry and the military, or other more destructive weaponry.

Where we disagree is, I think you're saying "Ban it unless there is a purpose to allow it." I'm saying "Allow it unless there is a reason to ban it." It sounds like a subtle difference but it's not.

Like a Woman's right to choose. Some will say you stop caring about protecting our kids once they come out of the womb. Not me mind you but others may think that.

[joeydb]

Originally Posted by jms62

Like a Woman's right to choose. Some will say you stop caring about protecting our kids once they come out of the womb. Not me mind you but others may think that.

Who's hijacking now? Nice try.

It's more the reverse: 99% of us are upset about what happened Friday at Sandy Hook, especially because kids were killed. Almost all of us - on both sides of the gun control argument - are upset by that. Six year olds should not be killed.

The number drops to 50% for babies 6 months premature and prior, via the "right to choose" (destruction of the growing baby) - just completing that oft-repeated sentence fragment.

Maybe they don't see it that way, but it is one way to look at it.

[jms62]

Originally Posted by joeydb

Who's hijacking now? Nice try.

It's more the reverse: 99% of us are upset about what happened Friday at Sandy Hook, especially because kids were killed. Almost all of us - on both sides of the gun control argument - are upset by that. Six year olds should not be killed.

The number drops to 50% for babies 6 months premature and prior, via the "right to choose" (destruction of the growing baby) - just completing that oft-repeated sentence fragment.

Maybe they don't see it that way, but it is one way to look at it.

Not Hijacking just making a point but it is big of you to admit to your prior hijack.

[joeydb]

Originally Posted by jms62

Not Hijacking just making a point but it is big of you to admit to your prior hijack.

Not really admitting anything - but since it was the reverse situation:

If my prior post was a hijack, then so is your post here.

If your post here is not a hijack, than neither was mine.

Pick one. No double standard here.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by joeydb

Everything is legal that is not expressly prohibited.

A purpose is not necessary at all. Like pet rocks and wallpaper.

But most gun owners do have one or more purposes. Most popular are self defense, home defense, target shooting (they do have automatic rifle competitions for that), just having fun with it at shooting range...

I guess here is the discriminator - guns, even automatic rifles, can be used for sport, hobbies and defensively. That would not be true of explosives, which are rightly banned outside of industry and the military, or other more destructive weaponry.

Where we disagree is, I think you're saying "Ban it unless there is a purpose to allow it." I'm saying "Allow it unless there is a reason to ban it." It sounds like a subtle difference but it's not.

people want hard core drugs. people want child porn. people want sex slaves. i still want my tank.
what's that got to do with it? i want it, so i should have it? of course not. many things are regulated, restricted, etc. why do guns get a pass? and there is a line drawn already on them. i don't have rpg's. the neighbor doesn't have sam's.