To those trying to use logic and the Constitution in your discussions with liberals on this issue - - - youre wasting your time. (I know because I've tried it for years.) They don't think - - - they emotionally react. They don't care about the Constitution or meanful crime reduction, or any of that. The 'men' are passive-aggressives who are cowardly and quite willing to have big brother take care of them & protect them - - no matter what the costs financially or in terms of personal freedom. (The women I have met often have the natural female aversion to anything that may seem 'aggressive'.)They don't care about any statistics, they just 'feel' that guns are 'bad' and that's is that. They know nothing on the subject. - - And the two lib women & one lib guy that I actually got to go to the range with me changed their viewpoint by 180 degrees within a month afterwards. They saw that there are responsible gun owners & the fear associated with the unknown was gone. They are useful pawns - - for those who want you disarmed. The Founding Fathers knew exactly what they were doing when they put the 2nd Amendment in the Bill of Rights. The best way to influence those who aren't a total lost cause is to take them to the range or field with a .22. Teach them safety and responsible gun ownership and use. - - -Regards, - -
The doctors of the time of the framing of the Constitution knew what they were doing. Because they knew what they were doing based on the level of scientific understanding, etc. in that day...that means today's doctors should be applying the same methods and technology, foregoing the advancements we have seen? Did the framers know that blacks should not have the right to vote, to marry a white woman, that women should be treated as property, etc.? The problem with the regressives is that they selectively apply inconsistent logic to a 200+ year old situation. When the issues are addressed, the klannish regressives fall back like parrot monkeys and repeat 2nd amendment, 2nd amendment ad infinitum...as if they lack the ability to look at present day reality both technologically and socially. A good parent wants his children to grow up and learn to think for themselves, which is what the Framers wanted. We don't live in the past, we live in the present moving toward the future...which is not 1776.
Answer these 2 simple questions. 1. Which First World country has the most lax gun laws? 2. Which First World country has the highest gun crime rate? Answer: The United States of America
I should correct myself - - all the anti-gun lib men aren't passive- agressive pu*$ies. I spoke with some young guys from Australia who were very anti-gun (given the restrictions in their country) and took them out to the range the next day. - - Their viewpoint turned around 180 degrees. In their case they had merely been brainwashed.
Youre not interested in the facts - - and I try not waste my time with those who don't, but a study was published in the Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy which dispels any link between murder & suicide rates and gun control laws. - - (And what would be your justification for such restrictions except to reduce these two factors ? Just your emotional reaction to 'evil guns' ?) Surely someone on a trading website should know something about sampling bias when it comes to data - - Nothing I say or evidence presented would convince you. But just for the helluva it, here's a link to an article about the Harvard study. You can go further into it if you'd like. http://www.cfif.org/htdocs/freedomline/current/in_our_opinion/Gun-Ownership.htm
This young lady seems to be aware of her constitutional rights, and would doubtfully be persuaded to give them up by the type of hackneyed reasons being offered here.