Quote:
|
Originally Posted by dksuddeth
1. They don't like/carry guns themselves so they want to make it as difficult as possible for everyone else to carry them
2. they want some sort of 'feel good' insurance policy in the head to help them make it through the day thinking 'if someone is carrying a gun, they at least know how to use it.
|
Thank you for numerating your points. Saves me the trouble.
1 - I still would not mind to take a class to own a gun.
2 - Yeah, so? What happened to better safe than sorry?
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by dksuddeth
I'm not the only person here talking about them, but it's been said numerous times that 'common folk' don't have the training to effectively use guns, like cops or the military do. So if that's the common belief, why shouldn't they be the bar?
|
That was before you and others unwittingly popped my bubble universe that cops had actual engagement training.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by dksuddeth
requiring classes and licenses to exercise a right, kinda defeats the purpose of it being a right, don't ya think? Not only that, but I believe there is a supreme court case that said no state can charge a license fee or tax for the exercise of a right that is federally protected.
|
Maybe this was all ready tackled by the linguistic artists. If not, I will sleep on this one.
@
Willravel:
While your way seems squeaky clean,
dksuddeth is right, and ties back to my concerns in the OP. If it were not for guns, the killer would make or buy explosives. Guns are only tools. Just like bombs. Just like screwdrivers.