Quote:
Originally Posted by timalkin
What part of "arms" is so hard to understand? At the time of the American Revolution, arms were considered to be weapons that you can carry in your own two hands. Can you carry a nuke in your own two hands? What about an M1 Abrams?
|
I can carry several kilos of powdered, weaponized anthrax in my own two hands. Or are we also assuming they have to be projectile weapons? One can likely put liquid chemical and biological weapons in a tranquilizer gun.
BTW, are you familiar with suitcase nukes? The popular held belief is that they've been around for over 30 years now.
Quote:
Originally Posted by timalkin
I get the feeling that the left is just scared of firearms. What is the big deal with law-abiding citizens owning guns? How does a law-abiding citizen owning a gun affect you?
|
Guns don't kill people, idiots with guns kill people. We're not scared of guns, we're just convinced that people generally don't need them.
-----Added 10/12/2008 at 10 : 12 : 18-----
Quote:
Originally Posted by powerclown
I think what goes unspoken is the fact that non-democratic governments historically have this strange tendency to 'permanently silence' their critics, dissidents, minorities and other defenseless rabble to the tune of 55 or so million people in the 20th century alone. To these governments, gun control meant just that - no guns for you, all the guns for us. Best I can tell it is garden variety fear...fear of what is misunderstood...fear of The Other Who Has Stuff That Makes Loud Noises.
|
The insinuation here seems clear: you assume that if you're armed you're safe from government tyranny. Of course when you really walk through that scenario in your mind, it becomes frighteningly clear how useless small arms would be against the military. They were armed at Waco. How'd that work out?