So , when you go to a DeSantis rally , would you go armed or will you choose to be a straight up unarmed ballwasher"?
since you like both Desantis and guns so much.
DeSantis for the win
- Thread starter Tsing Tao
- Start date
So , when you go to a DeSantis rally , would you go armed or will you choose to be a straight up unarmed ballwasher"?
since you like both Desantis and guns so much.
I read this three times to try to understand your point. It gets dumber each time.
An interesting point. What are the odds of "firearm required" danger to your family? If they're high, then the gun control advocates are being reasonable, because clearly there are way too many guns around. But if the odds are low then the gun control advocates are also being reasonable, because odds are you will never need one.
It’s like clockwork. Company takes a stand on some issue —> the right wing get outraged and attack it —> company overperforms
If it is high, the gun control advocates ARE correct about there being too many guns. The problem is that the gun control advocates only have one solution - remove my guns (they can't impact criminals). Which is unacceptable.
If it is low, then there's no need to remove guns because there's no problem to address.
This cuts both ways.
Reducing the overall supply of firearms would have to "impact criminals", at least over time as their supply is seized, lost, or destroyed. What you keep implying if not saying is that there's nothing we can do to reduce the number of firearms that criminals have, only the number the law abiding have, and I don't believe that, it's illogical, unless you believe we can't stop our own gun manufacturers, or importation (legal or not). Consider, too, that if liability was also attached to legal gun ownership as it is to car ownership, loose legal owners would in general "tighten up". They sure do in Canada, where there are strict storage and transportation laws.
If certain firearms, which say you owned some of those, were made illegal and an amnesty period for turn in were instituted, would you comply with the law and turn yours in?
No, I'm not saying there's nothing we can do. I'm saying there's nothing acceptable that has thus far been presented. Firearms can be maintained a long, long time. Firearms can now be 3D printed. Seize all you want and people can make pistols with a 3D printer for $1.50. Want some videos to watch and learn? It's openly out there. Houston recently had a buyback and someone actually took advantage of it by selling 3D printed guns until the city had to come back and say "we aren't buying 3D printed guns anymore". What a joke!
You're correct that seizing all firearms would eventually (key word: Eventually) have an impact. But during the time before "eventually", folks like myself and our families would be at risk as only bad guys had guns. You'll never, ever, ever get me at the table to accept that. Did I mention never ever? Never ever.
If you passed a law that made firearms I owned illegal, I would disobey the law, as would many, many folks. You would make criminals of legal taxpayers while having no effect at all on illegal owners of guns. My simple reason? It is better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6.
Now, if you passed the law and got rid of the illegal guns and bad guy's guns? You could take my guns and I'd even gift wrap them. But now we're back to Fantasy Land.
That's what I figured. No need to discuss it further.
Not if you're telling me I have to be disarmed while criminals aren't, no. You won't get anyone at the table for that other than those who believe in unicorns and rainbows.
But as I said, if you can solve the issue of bad guys having guns (you can't), I'll be in the very first seat at the table.