weapons are designed to kill. thats it. The only difference between a rock and a gun is that one is more efficient than the other at taking lives. the guys who will buy a gun to kill rival gang members, aren’t going to the local gun store. All these restrictions and regulations do is hurt law abiding citizens.
I don’t know how gang members obtain weapons, why don’t you enlighten me?
Maybe you could also tell me how firearms regulation (i.e. background checks, etc) “hurt law abiding citizens.” Because if they are law-abiding and they go through the correct process, they can and should be able to buy weapons.
Way to be overly literal in order to score an asinine point that isn’t close to relevant to the discussion. Enjoy your victory, chief, you earned it.
lol wrong thread
Firstly, i speak only for the States. Gang members buy guns illegally from people who either steal from the government, gun stores or buy directly from the manufacturer. Firearms regulation violates the second amendment in many ways. The fact Automatic weapons are illegal is ridiculous. Not to mention, because the supreme court has yet to establish whether or not Federal Law overrides state laws, places with large metropolitan areas do not allow people to possess hand guns, let alone carry one in public. Here in New York, people like Mayor Bloomberg think that these gun bans have an impact on crime, they don’t. The guy that uses a handgun for self defense or for use as a hobby is the only one effected by these laws. I think that background checks are appropriate, but i know any people who have gone through the process of gaining a pistol permit and had rigorous investigations ensue their process. meanwhile, right down the block, some gang banger buys a submachine gun out of the back of someones car.
Firearms regulation doesn’t violate the second Amendment. Blanket bans have been found to do so by the supreme court, so I wouldn’t support bans.
The gangbanger won’t need to pass a background check, but the guy who’s selling it to him did. More rigorous gun control would prevent that initial sale to the black-market dealer.
Who would want a soggy cookie?
in water?
How do you know that’s water in there?
Your right, I wouldn’t call City water real water either.
If guns are outlawed then only outlaws would have guns. That would leave the common citizen much more defenseless than if he had a gun.
i also live in the wild west
Hard mode: If you had to chose from guns being either completely banned, as in no citizen could obtain one legally in any way, or having them be completely unregulated, from semiautos, machine guns, hell, even fucking rocket launchers being perfectly legal, which would you choose?
Personally, I would choose the latter.
I want fucking nuclear bombs in everyone’s house. Nobody dare mess with you
or your things if you’ve got a Tsar Bomba pointed at any intruder. Amirite?
I’m not sure if the label of ‘guns’ expands to include ICBMs.
“Guns” are not in the Constitution. “Arms” are.
I don’t think the USA could ever become the large power it is today without arms. They’d just be a bunch of pushovers.
Yes thats true and also why if the shit hits the fan I have a militia.