Quote:
Originally Posted by Cimarron29414
Will,
This debate has been waged for decades. The trouble that we 2nd amendment people have with engaging in it is that typically our opponents in the debate are disingenuous in their intentions. Most will say "we only want to reduce these high capacity magazines" or "we only want to make it harder for criminals to get guns." The truth for most people who are fighting those fights is that what they really want is to eliminate all private ownership of handguns and assault rifles. Is that what you would really like to see? If not, where is the line for you?
|
The problem with 2nd amendment folks is that they see the issue as black and white / all or nothing. I've lived with some certifiable "gun nuts", I'm pretty damned indifferent to gun ownership, in general. There is clearly an escalating issue with gun violence and an absolute refusal to even discuss the issue among 2nd amendment folks. I also find it intellectually dishonest to continually quote the portion of the second amendment that you like, while ignoring it's qualifying clause.
Quote:
Originally Posted by KirStang
It just seems like rather than focusing on: How come loughner did not get the psychiatric help he probably needed?
We're focusing on guns as the problem....
|
The situation in Arizona doesn't happen without a gun. Mental health is the problem, but he's lucky to kill a single targeted person with a knife or baseball bat. Guns aren't the problem, but their easy access to criminals and/or insane is a problem.