Law enforcement officers overwhelmingly oppose gun control

Remove all ads!

"NRA fanatics?" Anyone who supports the Constitution is a "fanatic" now?

 

People with guns kill people. The constitution does nothing about it.
It's been documented how the ATF is deliberately weakened, and legislation passed supporting gun ownership without any regard to safety. Those actions probably aren't constitutional either, but I won't criticise it because it's unconstitutional. I find unregulated gun ownership morally wrong because it kills people. Police officers should feel the same way, unless they strongly support a gun cult which overrides any reasonable dialogue. So yes, I'd call them fanatics if they care more about their guns than they do about safety.

Or, could it be that some officers receive a commission per criminal case solved? That explains why they'd support gun proliferation. That's also a conflict of interest!

 

Some people believe that reducing violent deaths requires not regulating the property of decent people but rather identifying and dealing with the criminals who commit crimes in the first place. This does not make them insane or uncaring about the victims.

I would agree that sometimes the NRA and its ilk use tactics that "override any reasonable dialogue" -- but don't pretend that the anti-gun lobby doesn't do the same. Hystrionics make good sound bites but do not facilitate logical discourse.

 

where does the constitution say that anyone and everyone can own guns?

LKD, I see gun control like risk assessment, you remove any factor which applies to what you wish to prevent, risk assessment is a major part of my job, we use flammable chemicals so to prevent fire we remove any source of ignition, it is still not impossible that a fire could occur but we limit the risk. Same with guns if someone wanted me to risk assess mass killings I would suggest the removal of guns, that is not to say that killings would then be impossible, just that they would be more difficult to carry out.

 

I am a firm believer in gun control. In fact, I believe the government should confiscate every gun in America...and replace them with swords.

 

Well, in the original constitution the right of gun ownership was pretty much unlimited. Civilian rifles used at the time were basically the same weapon as their military counterparts, and there were no specifics laid out for not allowing criminals or mentally unstable people from owning them either.

Now I totally agree that a reasonable interpretation of the 2nd amendment entitles one to gun ownership if they are part of a local militia, it has never been interpreted as such despite local militias not being used during times of war for nearly 200 years. AFAIK, the last time a local militia was raised to combat an enemy invasion was during the War of 1812.

 

Armor too! Then we would have smithies all over the US, bringing US Steel back to the forefront of US Industry. Jobs galore. Economy problem solved!

 

Britain had a similar thing back in ye olde days, everyone owned and could shoot a bow, in the event that the island was invaded even the meekest village could cause the enemy harm, But today people don't walk around with long bows and fight for our rights to own a long bow to kill anyone who f**ks with us.

---------- Added 0 hours, 2 minutes and 8 seconds later... ----------

I just had a amusing picture in my mind, all these people who think that if someone was armed in that theatre then holmes wouldn't have been able to shoot those people before he was taken out, but instead a guy stands up from the back row and pops an arrow in his arse.