Yet another reason to ban assault weapons

oscardeuce

oscardeuce

Active Member
Originally Posted by bionicarm
http:///forum/post/2998645
You don't get it. Try opening your mind and imagine what it was like living back then. Then compare it today. Two totally different ways of living and thinking. Having the right to shoot someone you disagree with isn't the Law of the Land. What's hilarious is you're so adamant about this, and actually think you would have the possibility to 'defend the Constitution' against the tyrannical Barack Obama. How do you sleep at night?

It's Pelosi, Reid, Frank, Lee and Boxer who keep me up at night, All Obama can do is what the teleprompter tells him to do.
No, I do not have the "right" to just shoot someone,but I do have the right to bear arms like my ancestors against a gov't out of control and acting agains t you. Our gov't is starting to get out of control. Does that mean Revolution? not in the armed sense, but when a gov't confiscates 90% of legally gotten money ( more like 100% if you add in state and local taxes), then yes, things are getting out of control. I'd call confiscating 90%+ of my money legally gained tyrannical. Then again the gov't already takes 60%+ of what I make.
So, they take my money ( taxes, fica), my liberty ( card check, mandatory gov't service), my property ( for the sake of the animals), and now my guns and say they are upholding the Constitution? BS.
 
bionicarm

bionicarm

Active Member
Originally Posted by Veni Vidi Vici
http:///forum/post/2998662
I dont know ...maybe I do not write in terms that you understand.
Lets take Obama out of this discussion and just stick with the 2nd Amendment.
Lets say Congress wanted to pass a law that targets a group of individuals with a 90% tax because they didnt approve of something they legally did.
And after they do that, they want to limit what you can and cant say.Then they decide hey I like this lets just do away with the whole Constitution ,lets take away the rights of the people.We no longer work for them they now work for us.
Is this something that could never happen?If your answer is no then you havent been paying attention to history or whats going on right under your nose.Nations change in a blink of an eye because the people arent paying attention,or because they think that wont happen here...now ,in this day and age.
If you will go back a read everything i posted that is factual and unedited, you will know what and why we have the 2nd Amendment .I have a feeling you wont or cant understand it because you think the world is warm and rosie,that people dont become power hungry and greedy.I think you actually forgot who our Government works for and what their role is.It isnt to feed us,cloth us,provide shelter for us.........
Im curious,tell me what do you think our governments role is?Do you even know?
Again, i have shown you what some of the Founders said ive shown you what the SCOTUS has said and yet you dont agree that it is the law of the land,and have yet to provide information contrary . The founding fathers have spelled it out for you ,SCOTUS has spelled it out for you,numerous people here have tried to help you understand, but it seems to be futile.
So i dont know what else to tell you.

Vici, you've convoluted this thread with so much rhetorical crap, I honestly don't know what point you're trying to get across anymore. From what I get out of you is you love your guns, and you want to use some conservative interpretation of the 2nd Amendment whereby it was created so you can protect yourself from a tyrannical government. The problem with your theory is that using gun violence to overtake the government in this day and age is both illogical and ridiculous to comprehend. That's what I'm trying to tell you. If you feel that's what the founding father's meant by writing the 2nd Amendment, go ahead and believe it. But no reasonble individual would ever contemplate going to those extreme measures because the Government has 'gone out of control' as oscardeuce calls it.
What is the role of the government? To serve it's constituents using the Constitution as their basic principles for doing so. However, there are so many things that have changed in this world since the Bill Of Rights were first drawn up, that in order to maintain a level of normalcy and structure in this country, the document has to be occassionally modified. That's why there were Amendments added as our culture and society changed. You can't put the Constitution into some 'taboo status'. It has to be 'tweaked' every now and then as cultures and societal mentalities change. If we had left that document alone since its inception, women would just be baby factories, cooks and cleaners, Blacks would still be out in the cotton fields and in the kitchen cooking, and the only thing you could drink while watching the Super Bowl is Kool-Aid.
 
veni vidi vici

veni vidi vici

Active Member

Originally Posted by bionicarm
http:///forum/post/3000504
Vici, you've convoluted this thread with so much rhetorical crap, I honestly don't know what point you're trying to get across anymore. From what I get out of you is you love your guns, and you want to use some conservative interpretation of the 2nd Amendment whereby it was created so you can protect yourself from a tyrannical government. The problem with your theory is that using gun violence to overtake the government in this day and age is both illogical and ridiculous to comprehend. That's what I'm trying to tell you. If you feel that's what the founding father's meant by writing the 2nd Amendment, go ahead and believe it. But no reasonble individual would ever contemplate going to those extreme measures because the Government has 'gone out of control' as oscardeuce calls it.
What is the role of the government? To serve it's constituents using the Constitution as their basic principles for doing so. However, there are so many things that have changed in this world since the Bill Of Rights were first drawn up, that in order to maintain a level of normalcy and structure in this country, the document has to be occassionally modified. That's why there were Amendments added as our culture and society changed. You can't put the Constitution into some 'taboo status'. It has to be 'tweaked' every now and then as cultures and societal mentalities change. If we had left that document alone since its inception, women would just be baby factories, cooks and cleaners, Blacks would still be out in the cotton fields and in the kitchen cooking, and the only thing you could drink while watching the Super Bowl is Kool-Aid.
What you call conservative rhetorical crap the founding fathers along with the SCOTUS call the US Constitution
The only role the government has is to protect my basic God given rights period.
"That the sole object and only legitimate end of government is to protect the citizen in the enjoyment of life, liberty, and property, and when the government assumes other functions it is usurpation and oppression."
~Confirmed~
You are definitely a Progressive Liberal.
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
Not" We the Politicians."
 
bionicarm

bionicarm

Active Member

Originally Posted by Veni Vidi Vici
http:///forum/post/3000572
What you call conservative rhetorical crap the founding fathers along with the SCOTUS call the US Constitution
The only role the government has is to protect my basic God given rights period.
"That the sole object and only legitimate end of government is to protect the citizen in the enjoyment of life, liberty, and property, and when the government assumes other functions it is usurpation and oppression."
~Confirmed~
You are definitely a Progressive Liberal.
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
Not" We the Politicians."
You ask me the government's role is, I told you. You seem to forget The Politicians ARE The People. For some unknown reason you put them on a pedestal and want to treat them like some demi-god that has the power to do what they want to you. BECAUSE OF THE CONSTITUTION, they can't do that. How exactly does the government protect us in our enjoyment of life liberty, and the pursuit of happiness? By serving it's constituents using the Constitution as their basic principles for doing so. And where do you go by throwing God into the mix? Did God create the Constitution, or you now equating the politicians to your God, like the Greeks did? Is Congress now Mount Olympus?
 
veni vidi vici

veni vidi vici

Active Member

Originally Posted by bionicarm
http:///forum/post/3000744
You ask me the government's role is, I told you. You seem to forget The Politicians ARE The People
Wrong!
.
Originally Posted by bionicarm
http:///forum/post/3000744
For some unknown reason you put them on a pedestal and want to treat them like some demi-god that has the power to do what they want to you. BECAUSE OF THE CONSTITUTION, they can't do that. How exactly does the government protect us in our enjoyment of life liberty, and the pursuit of happiness?By serving it's constituents using the Constitution as their basic principles for doing so.
I think you have really misread everything iI have wrote if you think I am putting politicians on a pedestal.And i case you havent been paying attention,they are pretty much are doing what they want.Its not the governments job to provide Life,Liberty ,and The Pursuit of Happiness,only to protect it.
Originally Posted by bionicarm
http:///forum/post/3000744
And where do you go by throwing God into the mix? Did God create the Constitution, or you now equating the politicians to your God, like the Greeks did? Is Congress now Mount Olympus?

Read some US history,you really have no idea what they have said "Founding Fathers" and what they had in mind while writing the Constitution do you?
They refer to rights given from God to man and based the Constitution on that principal.
"In God We Trust"
 
veni vidi vici

veni vidi vici

Active Member
Originally Posted by bionicarm
http:///forum/post/3001122
Ain't that the truth. I'm getting a major headache after everyone of Vici's posts...

Ehehe,as soon as you people stop talking about gun regulations and trying to circumvent the Constitution we can stop debating.
And thats not going to happen since most Americans still love this country.

I can solve your headache though and end this thread.Just stop posting in it lol.
 
bionicarm

bionicarm

Active Member
Originally Posted by Veni Vidi Vici
http:///forum/post/3001287
Ehehe,as soon as you people stop talking about gun regulations and trying to circumvent the Constitution we can stop debating.
And thats not going to happen since most Americans still love this country.

I can solve your headache though and end this thread.Just stop posting in it lol.
But it's so much fun tweaking you and getting you wriled up. Just wind you up like that Energizer Bunny, push the button and watch you go!
Sure most American's love this country. But most Americans could care less about gun laws and assault weapon restrictions. You sir are still the minority on that front. If that wasn't the case, the DC ban would've never happened. Most Americans worry if they can keep their job, or even find one. Most Americans worry whether they'll have a roof over their head tomorrow. Most Americans wonder if they'll be able to retire or send their kids to college. See how small and how low on the totem pole gun restricitions sit? No one is 'circumventing' the Constitution. They just interpret it differently from you from time to time. Interesting how you've seem to take ownership of the Constitution. I thought it was owned by EVERY American.
 
veni vidi vici

veni vidi vici

Active Member
Originally Posted by bionicarm
http:///forum/post/3001658
But it's so much fun tweaking you and getting you wriled up. Just wind you up like that Energizer Bunny, push the button and watch you go!
Ha ! Im sorry to disappoint you but i love to debate and as far as getting riled up,NAhhh sorry thats not the case at all.
Originally Posted by bionicarm
http:///forum/post/3001658
Sure most American's love this country. But most Americans could care less about gun laws and assault weapon restrictions. You sir are still the minority on that front.
I beg to differ.Most American still understand why we have this right and what it is for,including politicians that hold office at the local ,state ,and federal level.Otherwise the Second Amendment would have been amended long ago."The last line of defense against Tyranny"
Your failure to realize this with all of the fact i have pointed out ,and directly quoted for you makes me wonder if you have a problem with comprehension.
If The People didnt care if the government removed this right ,this amendment would have been rescinded already.The fact is The People due care.
Originally Posted by bionicarm
http:///forum/post/3001658
If that wasn't the case, the DC ban would've never happened. Most Americans worry if they can keep their job, or even find one. Most Americans worry whether they'll have a roof over their head tomorrow. Most Americans wonder if they'll be able to retire or send their kids to college. See how small and how low on the totem pole gun restricitions sit?
The DC Gun Ban ,AWB,while questionably well intentioned are failures both on Constitutional grounds as well as crime reduction statistics.
Of course America faces much these days but that dosnt mean any of our Constitutional Right need be trampled on.
And i would argue that if gun restriction sits so low on the totem pole ,why is the Obama administration attempting to do it?"In the exact words of Rom Emanuel “Rule one: Never allow a crisis to go to waste”
Originally Posted by bionicarm
http:///forum/post/3001658
No one is 'circumventing' the Constitution. They just interpret it differently from you from time to time. Interesting how you've seem to take ownership of the Constitution. I thought it was owned by EVERY American.
I do claim partial ownership of the Constitution in the "We The People "sense.
Circumvent:1 a: to hem in b: to make a circuit around2: to manage to get around especially by ingenuity or stratagem.
UMMM Have you ever seen a Lawyers Interpret law and twist it or add circumstance to free criminals? Well here is a news flash for you,what do you think most of these politicians main vocations are? Answer is Lawyers that are good at circumventing.Same is true for the Progressive Liberal.
Three-card Monte game on a National scale.
I dont know,maybe im paranoid or.........
You are either blind or on the side of those who hate America.
Im still waiting for you to post some fact here other than your opinion.
I know I have posted quite a bit of factual information and have yet to see any from you.
 
bionicarm

bionicarm

Active Member

Originally Posted by Veni Vidi Vici
http:///forum/post/3001760
Ha ! Im sorry to disappoint you but i love to debate and as far as getting riled up,NAhhh sorry thats not the case at all.
I beg to differ.Most American still understand why we have this right and what it is for,including politicians that hold office at the local ,state ,and federal level.Otherwise the Second Amendment would have been amended long ago."The last line of defense against Tyranny"
Your failure to realize this with all of the fact i have pointed out ,and directly quoted for you makes me wonder if you have a problem with comprehension.
If The People didnt care if the government removed this right ,this amendment would have been rescinded already.The fact is The People due.
The DC Gun Ban ,AWB,while questionably well intentioned are failures both on Constitutional grounds as well as crime reduction statistics.
Of course America faces much these days but that dosnt mean any of our Constitutional Right need be trampled on.
And i would argue that if gun restriction sits so low on the totem pole ,why is the Obama administration attempting to do it?"In the exact words of Rom Emanuel “Rule one: Never allow a crisis to go to waste”
I do claim partial ownership of the Constitution in the "We The People "sense.
Circumvent:1 a: to hem in b: to make a circuit around2: to manage to get around especially by ingenuity or stratagem.
UMMM Have you ever seen a Lawyers Interpret law and twist it or add circumstance to free criminals? Well here is a news flash for you,what do you think most of these politicians main vocations are? Answer is Lawyers that are good at circumventing.Same is true for the Progressive Liberal.
Three-card Monte game on a National scale.
I dont know,maybe im paranoid or.........
You are either blind or on the side of those who hate America.
You are one funny individual. Your twisted views on politics and life are better than reading the comic section every morning. Trust me Vici, you're the minority on this one. Do a poll sometime. Go find an accurate poll that categorically states that gun ownership is the top issue or concern of the MAJORITY of Americans TODAY. Not 5 or 10 years ago, not from some NRA-backed blog or web site. Government statistics. Bet it's under 25%. Unless it's over 50%, YOU'RE THE MINORITY. I assume Obama is bringing the issue back up because he's one of the MAJORITY Americans that disagrees with gun violence and the problems it causes in this country.
You accuse me of being blind or hating America?
This coming from a guy who has no faith in our political system, thinks politicians are above the law, and are trying to destroy the Constitution. I won't argue lawyers are a bunch of ambulance-chasing crooks. I have a couple in my family, and don't trust either of them. I do however have faith in our current political system, and how it's designed to keep the Constitution unchanged unless a MAJORITY of Americans agree it should be changed. Think Reefraff or Darth informed you of that one WAY BACK in this thread.
I'm always for letting The People decide what should be done in these circumstances. I'd rather have all these controversial issues be put up for a National vote. Let America vote whether there should be a ban on assault weapons, let America vote whether we should allow abortion, stem cell research, The Day After Pill. But the problem with that is that's why we have the political system that is defined in the Declaration and Constitution. Your coveted documents are what state that we have representation of the people to make those decisions for us. That's why we have Senators and House members. So it's ironic you want to hate the system that the Constitution says we should respect. Sorry, can't have it both ways. Keep trying those debate tactics though. You may get them right sooner or later.
 
veni vidi vici

veni vidi vici

Active Member
Originally Posted by bionicarm
http:///forum/post/3001780
You are one funny individual. Your twisted views on politics and life are better than reading the comic section every morning. Trust me Vici, you're the minority on this one. Do a poll sometime. Go find an accurate poll that categorically states that gun ownership is the top issue or concern of the MAJORITY of Americans TODAY. Not 5 or 10 years ago, not from some NRA-backed blog or web site. Government statistics. Bet it's under 25%. Unless it's over 50%, YOU'RE THE MINORITY. I assume Obama is bringing the issue back up because he's one of the MAJORITY Americans that disagrees with gun violence and the problems it causes in this country.
You accuse me of being blind or hating America?
This coming from a guy who has no faith in our political system, thinks politicians are above the law, and are trying to destroy the Constitution. I won't argue lawyers are a bunch of ambulance-chasing crooks. I have a couple in my family, and don't trust either of them. I do however have faith in our current political system, and how it's designed to keep the Constitution unchanged unless a MAJORITY of Americans agree it should be changed. Think Reefraff or Darth informed you of that one WAY BACK in this thread.
I'm always for letting The People decide what should be done in these circumstances. I'd rather have all these controversial issues be put up for a National vote. Let America vote whether there should be a ban on assault weapons, let America vote whether we should allow abortion, stem cell research, The Day After Pill. But the problem with that is that's why we have the political system that is defined in the Declaration and Constitution. Your coveted documents are what state that we have representation of the people to make those decisions for us. That's why we have Senators and House members. So it's ironic you want to hate the system that the Constitution says we should respect. Sorry, can't have it both ways. Keep trying those debate tactics though. You may get them right sooner or later.
LOL Confirmed:You have a comprehension problem and are ill informed.
Here are some more fun filled fact for you.
National poll conducted by http://www.quinnipiac.edu/x1295.xml?ReleaseID=1194
2008
Would you support or oppose amending the United States Constitution to ban individual gun ownership?
Support / 17%
Oppose / 78%
DN/NA / 6 %
 
veni vidi vici

veni vidi vici

Active Member
Here are some more facts for you:
* Assault weapons were involved in less than 1% of homicides before the assault weapons ban took effect in 1994. The same is true as of 1998. (3)
* As of 1998, about 13% of homicides involve knives, 5% involve bludgeons, and 6% are committed with hands and feet. (3)
* The Clinton administration prosecuted 4 people in 1997 and 4 people in 1998 for violating the assault weapons ban. (22)
And some more:
Constitution
* In the Bill of Rights, the second amendment to the Constitution reads:
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed."
* Gun control proponents have argued that the use of the word "people" in this Amendment, refers not to the civilian population of the United States, but to the State National Guard Units. (54)
* Gun rights proponents have argued that the use of the word "Militia" in this Amendment, refers not to the State National Guard Units, but to the citizens of the United States. (54)
* James Madison was responsible for proposing the Second Amendment and was one of three authors of the Federalist Papers, a group of essays published in newspapers to explain and lobby for ratification of the Constitution. (55)(56)
* In Federalist Paper 46, James Madison argued that a standing federal army could not be capable of conducting a coup to take over the nation. He estimated that based on the country's population at the time, a federal standing army could not field more than 25,000 - 30,000 men. He wrote:
"To these would be opposed a militia amounting to near half a million of citizens with arms in their hands, officered by men chosen from among themselves, fighting for their common liberties, and united and conducted by governments possessing their affections and confidence."
"Besides the advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation, the existence of subordinate governments, to which the people are attached, and by which the militia officers are appointed, forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition, more insurmountable than any which a simple government of any form can admit of. Notwithstanding the military establishments in the several kingdoms of Europe, which are carried as far as the public resources will bear, the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms." (56)
* Quotes from Thomas Jefferson, the author of The Declaration of Independence:
"What country can preserve its liberties if its rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms." --Thomas Jefferson to William Stephens Smith, 1787.
"A strong body makes the mind strong. As to the species of exercises, I advise the gun. While this gives moderate exercise to the body, it gives boldness, enterprise and independence to the mind. Games played with the ball, and others of that nature, are too violent for the body and stamp no character on the mind. Let your gun therefore be your constant companion of your walks." --Thomas Jefferson to Peter Carr, 1785.
"The constitutions of most of our States assert that all power is inherent in the people; that they may exercise it by themselves in all cases to which they think themselves competent..., or they may act by representatives, freely and equally chosen; that it is their right and duty to be at all times armed; that they are entitled to freedom of person, freedom of religion, freedom of property, and freedom of the press." --Thomas Jefferson to John Cartwright, 1824.
http://www.justfacts.com/guncontrol.asp#CONSTITUTION
 
oscardeuce

oscardeuce

Active Member
Compare assault rifles to the real killers out there, alcohol and tobacco. How many people are killed or maimed by these producs every year?
 
bionicarm

bionicarm

Active Member

Originally Posted by Veni Vidi Vici
http:///forum/post/3001827
Show me some fact to back up your argument, otherwise its just your opinion and we all no what opinions are like
Read the one above it:
31. Do you support or oppose stricter gun control laws in the United States?
Tot Rep Dem Ind Men Wom Wht Blk
Support 54% 32% 72% 51% 43% 65% 50% 70%
Oppose 40 63 23 43 54 28 45 26
DK/NA 5 4 5 5 4 7 6 4
 
bionicarm

bionicarm

Active Member
Originally Posted by Veni Vidi Vici
http:///forum/post/3001791
LOL Confirmed:You have a comprehension problem and are ill informed.
Here are some more fun filled fact for you.
National poll conducted by http://www.quinnipiac.edu/x1295.xml?ReleaseID=1194
2008
Would you support or oppose amending the United States Constitution to ban individual gun ownership?
Support / 17%
Oppose / 78%
DN/NA / 6 %
All this poll supports is your theory that most Americans don't want the Constitution modified for any reason. Look up the poll that ranks where owning guns is a major concern for Americans at this time. Get back to me when you find it.
 
bionicarm

bionicarm

Active Member
Originally Posted by Veni Vidi Vici
http:///forum/post/3001822
Here are some more facts for you:
* Assault weapons were involved in less than 1% of homicides before the assault weapons ban took effect in 1994. The same is true as of 1998. (3)
* As of 1998, about 13% of homicides involve knives, 5% involve bludgeons, and 6% are committed with hands and feet. (3)
* The Clinton administration prosecuted 4 people in 1997 and 4 people in 1998 for violating the assault weapons ban. (22)
And some more:
Constitution
* In the Bill of Rights, the second amendment to the Constitution reads:
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed."
* Gun control proponents have argued that the use of the word "people" in this Amendment, refers not to the civilian population of the United States, but to the State National Guard Units. (54)
* Gun rights proponents have argued that the use of the word "Militia" in this Amendment, refers not to the State National Guard Units, but to the citizens of the United States. (54)
* James Madison was responsible for proposing the Second Amendment and was one of three authors of the Federalist Papers, a group of essays published in newspapers to explain and lobby for ratification of the Constitution. (55)(56)
* In Federalist Paper 46, James Madison argued that a standing federal army could not be capable of conducting a coup to take over the nation. He estimated that based on the country's population at the time, a federal standing army could not field more than 25,000 - 30,000 men. He wrote:
"To these would be opposed a militia amounting to near half a million of citizens with arms in their hands, officered by men chosen from among themselves, fighting for their common liberties, and united and conducted by governments possessing their affections and confidence."
"Besides the advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation, the existence of subordinate governments, to which the people are attached, and by which the militia officers are appointed, forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition, more insurmountable than any which a simple government of any form can admit of. Notwithstanding the military establishments in the several kingdoms of Europe, which are carried as far as the public resources will bear, the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms." (56)
* Quotes from Thomas Jefferson, the author of The Declaration of Independence:
"What country can preserve its liberties if its rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms." --Thomas Jefferson to William Stephens Smith, 1787.
"A strong body makes the mind strong. As to the species of exercises, I advise the gun. While this gives moderate exercise to the body, it gives boldness, enterprise and independence to the mind. Games played with the ball, and others of that nature, are too violent for the body and stamp no character on the mind. Let your gun therefore be your constant companion of your walks." --Thomas Jefferson to Peter Carr, 1785.
"The constitutions of most of our States assert that all power is inherent in the people; that they may exercise it by themselves in all cases to which they think themselves competent..., or they may act by representatives, freely and equally chosen; that it is their right and duty to be at all times armed; that they are entitled to freedom of person, freedom of religion, freedom of property, and freedom of the press." --Thomas Jefferson to John Cartwright, 1824.
http://www.justfacts.com/guncontrol.asp#CONSTITUTION
Your facts here pretty much prove my point that opposite groups have differing opinions and different ways in interpreting the 2nd Amendment.
The top of your rant is just a regurgitation of some NRA propaganda material. Irrelevent to the argument. Try again. This is getting good.
 
bionicarm

bionicarm

Active Member
Originally Posted by oscardeuce
http:///forum/post/3001860
Compare assault rifles to the real killers out there, alcohol and tobacco. How many people are killed or maimed by these producs every year?
Ah, the old comparison analogy. Like this hasn't been stated 100 times already in this argument.
Alcohol and tobacco are self inflicting. Not too many people purposely kill themselves by shooting 50 rounds in 10 seconds into their body. Now tell me how many people die by drunk drivers than by assault weapons. I have no argument about that. Prosecute the bums, lock them up, and throw the key away. However, killing someone driving drunk is not usually an intentional offense. Someone shooting another person with an assault weapon is normally intentional in most cases.
 
oscardeuce

oscardeuce

Active Member
Originally Posted by bionicarm
http:///forum/post/3001971
Ah, the old comparison analogy. Like this hasn't been stated 100 times already in this argument.
Alcohol and tobacco are self inflicting. Not too many people purposely kill themselves by shooting 50 rounds in 10 seconds into their body. Now tell me how many people die by drunk drivers than by assault weapons. I have no argument about that. Prosecute the bums, lock them up, and throw the key away. However, killing someone driving drunk is not usually an intentional offense. Someone shooting another person with an assault weapon is normally intentional in most cases.
Drunk driving not intentional, hah.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top