Add comments: Questions for those against gun laws

[AlanM]

Serious Questions For Those Who Oppose Gun Laws

In the wake of the latest example of America’s ridiculous and indefensible gun culture, a few questions for those who perpetuate this idiocy:

If an armed society is a polite society, then do you agree that the problem in Chicago is that there just aren’t enough guns?

In which of two fantasy worlds—one where everyone had a gun, and one where no one had a gun—would more people die by violence?

If we promise not to confiscate your guns, can we have the bullets?

If you support gun rights to oppose tyranny, are you worried that members of the military are just going to follow orders and attack you, even though they predominantly come from the same places, have the same background, and most of the same values as you?

Please add your comments to this article. Be nice and be factual.

[AlanM]

Here's my start:

1. There aren't enough guns in the hands of Law Abiding Citizens in Chicago. Law enforcement is seriously out gunned and needs help.

2. Many more people are harmed or killed by means other than firearms. Magically removing all guns won't stop, or even slow down, violent crime.

3. Have our bullets, no, as was said by another commenter, many more bullets are fired in shooting sports and hunting than are ever used in violent crimes.

4. When I served in the US military I was trained to NOT obey illegal orders, orders that violated the US Constitution. I trust that most if not all current military members will do the same.

5. Do you REALLY think the US Government would bomb their own people? Get real.

6. The difference between a legal open carrier and an armed criminal is the first keeps his gun holstered until he is in a life or death situation, the murderer has his gun in his hand and is probably firing.

7. How to tell which is which: the bad guy is shooting at unarmed innocents, the good guy is carefully shooting at the bad guy.

8. The Second Amendment is the one that protects all the others. The first ten amendments are ALL limits on the federal government and protect us from that government one way or another.

[scott9050]

http://www.vaguntrader.com/forums/ubbth ... Post932255

https://www.nraila.org/articles/2015082 ... in-america

https://www.nraila.org/articles/2015081 ... or-answers

[MarcSpaz]

This was my comment...

Actually, the problem in Chicago is there are not enough guns in the hands of GOOD people due to laws in the city and state. Investigation Discovery had a televised poll of criminals in jail who said that they would intentionally avoid victimizing a citizen if they thought that potential victim was armed.

As I mentioned below, today, we are ranked 98th by the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime for total murder per capita, of 218 countries. The top 50 countries in the UNODC, guns are completely outlawed for private ownership. That hardly sounds like a problem with US gun ownership of good people.

With regard to your question of “How do we tell the difference between an Open Carry activist and a murderer who just came to the fast food place to kill as many people as possible? Do we just wait until they start shooting?” Well, yes. I mean, we don’t stop people from going into a store or arrest them for stealing unless we have caught them stealing. We don’t stop people from driving or put them in jail for drunk driving until they drive drunk. Our laws are to punish people for doing thinks wrong, not to preemptively punish everyone because they may do something wrong, someday, maybe.

Plus, if many others were armed, they could defend themselves and others rather than just laying there and being a victim.

To bring some reality to it, let’s have you arrested because you may publish an article to insight a riot or spark a revolution. I mean, how do we know you are not going to write something like that? How can we trust you with a pen or a computer? You might use them to spark the overthrow of the US government. I mean, all revolutions are sparked by a great insperation. You may personally and directly cause a revolution.

Sounds pretty stupid, doesn’t it? Well, so does your argument.

[SHMIV]

The author of that "article" is ignorant of the facts. Many of his questions are based on false premises.

I'd answer his questions if there was a way answer without Facebook, though.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

[WVUBeta1904]

What in God's name is this guy blabbering on about??

Do you want to live in a country in which you have to sleep with a gun under your pillow in order to feel safe? Is that freedom?

Ideally?...No, I wouldn't - hell, why would anybody want that?!

HOWEVER, to a lot of people, this is their reality...so whether it's 'freedom' as a definition to them or not, it's also a very realistic interpretation of the lives that some less fortunate individuals are living. By the way, it's also supposed to be an uninfringeable right provided by the US Constitution, regardless of demographic.

This guy is an imbecile.

[SHMIV]

I note that the author is pictured in a bathtub, holding a hair dryer. I suppose that should tell us something about his IQ.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

[dorminWS]

Do I want to live in a country in which I have to sleep with a gun under my pillow in order to feel safe? Is that freedom?

No, I don't WANT to live that way. But what I DO want is to LIVE. Is that freedom? It MIGHT be, if that's what it takes. I'd rather live in a country in which I have to sleep with a gun under my pillow in order to feel safe than the alternative that would be available in such a country, which would be not feeling safe because you aren't and being subject to the rule of the strongest/most numerous/best armed no matter how depraved they might be.

So when you bother to think it through, that's a really silly-assed question to begin with.

[graybeard321]

Do I want to live in a country in which I have to sleep with a gun under my pillow in order to feel safe? Is that freedom?

No but I want the right to do so if I choose.

[scott9050]

Do you want to live in a country where the government tells you that you have to have health insurance, spies on your phone records and internet usage and has a President that spends more time on the golf course than most PGA pros? Is that freedom?