Originally Posted by heliodorus04
Let me back off a little bit and do some marketing research, here.
I'm a 2nd Amendment 'nut'. I want to be able to buy military hardware up to and including the Squad Automatic Weapon
... TO me, the 2nd Amendment exists so low-lifes like me can rise up against a corrupt, tyrannical government.
Here's my question for the 2nd Amendment Supporters:
Does the fact that the Tucson shooter obtained all his death tools LEGALLY indicate to you that we have a problem with the legal requirements to own a (hand)gun?
For me, obviously, it does. I'm not sure I'm not being foolish, but I feel a strong impetus to make it more difficult for this scenario to play out again.
I'm not asking for your solutions, just whehter you think the laws as they exists have been demonstrated to be too lax.
I am surprised at you level of ire towards all this....
The fact is that a society with freedoms will also have said freedoms cause some harm. This is evident with the courts (bogus cases), first amendment (KKK, Westboro) and the 2nd amendment.
If we truly wanted to stop nutjobs from committing any harm we would have to only allow employed, intelligent, educated people to have children. That alone would do more than getting rid of weapons. Of course this is a personal liberties issue that would never take hold......
I agree that some people should not have guns, I'll say that many people should own cars or have kids. However we allow the few that shouldn't because it is part of allowing the vast majority that can and should.
Beside we limit magazine capacity, what about existing magazines? I'm sure not giving up my high cap mags that i LEGALLY purchased. Until I can be assured that crazy people and criminals don't have high capacity magazines you can gent bent.
It is quite unpopular to mention the 2A as insurance against a tyranical govt' but that to me is one of the most important reason to leave it as it is. I frankly don't trust the government as a whole, and being that I dont have a helicopter or tank I want to have what I have and be able to keep it.
Oddly enough some of the biggest anti-gun politicians have Concealed Carry Permits; Feinstein, Pelosi, etc.... Its funny that in CA an ordinary citizen can not get a CCW, but a gun bashing, gun grabbing politician with money can get one, even though the state provides them a security detail.
I'd likely change my tune had I know people shot in Tuscon, but what is more benificial to a free nation. Oppressive gun laws, less shootings, and an unarmed populace OR current laws, a few shootings, and a population that could defend against tyranny?
I'll take my chances getting shot be a crazy, but then again I may shoot back.... Besides I hate malls and cities.