Quote:
Originally Posted by Journeyman
To say that guns are irrelevant to the cause of liberty because the people will be manipulated into accepting tyranny consentually rather than coerced into it is very pessimistic and ignores three bits: 1) I am 20, 2) I and others like me have a lifespan that will average out to 80 more years or so on this planet, and 3) Some of them feel the same way I do (that suffrage and speech are not priveledges, and will not forget that anytime soon).
|
I'm sure you and your friends will stand up for what you believe in to the day you die. But the size of a revolution that would be required to defeat the U.S. Military is going to need to include very many of the same type of people that support the last 4 years of the destruction of our rights. It only takes just enough fear for someone to be willing to give up another right. It's not going to happen overnight, but if/when it does happen, there won't be enough willing people to mount a successful revolution. It's math. It's why media control/consolidation is the real threat and, in this aspect, gun ownership limitations are not.
Quote:
As to the classifications, I do not agree that a pistol grip rifle with a clip capacity of 12 rounds is more dangerous than a pistol grip rifle with a clip capacity of 10 rounds, but the assault weapon classification scheme would have me believe just that. It's not the labeling of the items that I care about, it's the defining factors.
|
I'm not going to pretend to know the in's and out's of the technicalities of where in the chart of weapon classification any particular gun might fall. But assuredly there will be cut off points. Maybe 12 bullets is a better cut off point than 10 bullets. But what about 14 bullets? Or 24? In order to classify, a line must be drawn somewhere. Should it be just below fully automatic? My impression is that there are weapons that approach the danger level of fully automatic without reaching it - and I have to question their usefulness for hunting, sport or personal defense.