Quote:
|
Originally Posted by dksuddeth
what about them? what do we establish as normal? or non dangerous? who makes the rules? Do we even go so far as to say that if a person IS on an ADHD med, they can't have a gun? But if they AREN'T on it, they shouldn't own a gun?
|
What do we establish as normal? Behavioral patterns that are not conducive to aggressive violence. You'd think that would be obvious. Don't give guns to people who have clear tendencies and patterns that would suggest dangerous behavior.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by dksuddeth
The more checks and requirements you establish for a person to exercise a right, the less it becomes a right and the more a priviledge. Do you NEED the government to tell you what you can and cannot do?
|
Who said anything about the government? I think it should be the gun companies that do it, and they are simply monitored by local government. They are the ones who keep the door to Pandora's box perpetually open.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by debaser
If you doubt my credibility than you needn't reply to my posts. Suffice to say that all non-lethal equipment we are trained on, we must experience the effects of.
|
What type of mace were you exposed to? Where were you hit with the bean bag?
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by debaser
As for your bean-bag scenario, I would put to you that if you can say that you can just as easily say that if you had a pistol you wouldn't have been shot either, and it would have been a damn sight easier to pack around than a 40mm grenade launcher or a 12 gauge shotgun (which are used to fire bean-bag projectiles).
|
The point is that I would have been substantially less likely to mortally would the shooter with a bean bag gun than a gun.