🚀 go-pugleaf

Lets see....calm.....decent grammar,
......thoughtful,......rational...... and full of the same paranoia
that he accuses gun owners of.

Dimitri, the only thing we want is what is guaranteed to us by the
Constitution.....the right to bear arms....IF we choose to.  Our
forefathers wanted (IMO) to guarantee that their ancestors (us) would
never again be subjected to the tyranny that literally caused the
formation of the US to begin with.  If the government can basically
delete the 2nd Amendment at will, what is to keep them from deleting
the Right of Free Speech as well?  Ban gun ownership today, and
tomorrow keep the word FREEDOM from appearing in text?


On 30 Aug 1999 20:52:07 GMT, dim@soda.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU (D.
Gerasimatos) wrote:

>If more gun-owners were like him and fewer like you then perhaps a
>compromise could be reached. Instead you choose to completely reject
>valid points as idiotic because they do not agree with the world as you
>see it.
>
>
>It bugs us that gun owners become quite irrational when it comes to guns.
>I personally believe that gun owners suffer from paranoia more than
>hysteria. There's always someone (government, criminals, etc.) out to
>get them that they may need to shoot. It's one thing to say you want a
>weapon for sport, but I just cannot see why you feel the need to have
>a firearm to defend yourself. While at home, your firearm should be in
>a locked cabinet where it would *not* be easy to access if you did need
>it. I don't understand why an armed society makes you feel so safe. It
>makes me feel uncomfortable. Can a gun come in handy sometimes? You bet.
>Can an armed society be a peaceful society? That depends on the motives
>for the acquisition of the arms. 
>
>
>What gun-owners need to realize is that laws designed to halt the proliferation
>of firearms are in their best interests as well and that they should
>actively participate in the regulatory process. Instead, most gun-owners
>adopt an all-or-nothing approach and regard any regulation as despicable.
>It's not too much to demand licensing, training, background checks, and
>the like. It's also not too much to limit the sale of certain types of
>weapons. I realize that the thinking is "give an inch, they'll take a
>mile" but that thinking may just backfire as someone else pointed out. 
>
>
>
>Dimitri
>

--
The original point and click interface was a Smith & Wesson.
Straight Shootin Y'all.