So you say my answer is typical and just dismiss the whole argument. I'd say thats typical of ppl that don't have a strong argument. The best part is you admit you don't know about guns. Boom. Right there it says it all.
No ma'am. That is not what I said at all. I was making an observation about how defensive you got. That does not dismiss your argument. I responded pretty clearly to what you were saying.
Gun owners are rightly defensive when ppl who don't know what there talking about start in on how other ppls rights should be curbed.
I'm sure you have some liberty you enjoy and would be irritated if someone wanted to impinge on your ability to enjoy it especially if that person admitted they didn't know anything about it.
This is what I don't think a lot of gun owners quite understand. The second amendment isn't there to promote your recreational gun use over all other freedoms in this country. " A well regulated militia" is what it says. It is there for safety reasons. For security. To protect our freedoms in one way or another. At that time probably from government as well as other people, but today mostly just to protect ourselves from other people because let's be realistic... no one can fight the military with the massive amount of firepower that it now has.
I don't need to know anything about guns to interpret the second amendment... fair enough? It's someone else's words, not mine.
If gun violence starts to impose on other people's rights to just walk around and feel safe and feel like they can say and do what they want without being attacked, then we have to consider actions necessary in order to uphold the other freedoms that people are entitled to.
Questions on gun control
↑ View this comment's parent
← View full post
So you say my answer is typical and just dismiss the whole argument. I'd say thats typical of ppl that don't have a strong argument. The best part is you admit you don't know about guns. Boom. Right there it says it all.
--
Cocomilktitties
7 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
-2
-2
No ma'am. That is not what I said at all. I was making an observation about how defensive you got. That does not dismiss your argument. I responded pretty clearly to what you were saying.
--
mysistersshadow
7 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
Gun owners are rightly defensive when ppl who don't know what there talking about start in on how other ppls rights should be curbed.
I'm sure you have some liberty you enjoy and would be irritated if someone wanted to impinge on your ability to enjoy it especially if that person admitted they didn't know anything about it.
--
Cocomilktitties
7 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
This is what I don't think a lot of gun owners quite understand. The second amendment isn't there to promote your recreational gun use over all other freedoms in this country. " A well regulated militia" is what it says. It is there for safety reasons. For security. To protect our freedoms in one way or another. At that time probably from government as well as other people, but today mostly just to protect ourselves from other people because let's be realistic... no one can fight the military with the massive amount of firepower that it now has.
I don't need to know anything about guns to interpret the second amendment... fair enough? It's someone else's words, not mine.
If gun violence starts to impose on other people's rights to just walk around and feel safe and feel like they can say and do what they want without being attacked, then we have to consider actions necessary in order to uphold the other freedoms that people are entitled to.
--
mysistersshadow
7 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
When you can articulate how another law will help you might have a point. Now your just advocating a "solution" that will change nothing.