Thread: Ultimate Test of Civility ~ 2nd Amendment

Ilija...

I'm glad you numbered things. I won't have to cut and paste.

Point #1. I'm more concerned about the criminals than I am about Clinton wanting to grow a narrow mustache, stomp around, and begin yelling "Heil Hillary" It was the 2nd Amendment, not the 20th. That tells me those old fuddies with a ton of wisdom under their belt thought guns were pretty important. Every other Amendment has been expanded and given generous latitude in interpretation. The 2nd has been restricted and infringed upon.

Point #2. More likely to survive a beating or stabbing? Why are you accepting the role of victim? How 'bout the criminal surviving the bullet wound between his eyes? Or would you rather have your wife be the one to survive the beating or stabbing? Betcha Ron Goldman sure could have used a gun. I think it is naive to think criminals won't be as likely to hurt you if they don't have a gun.

Point #3. First of all, the point you try to make about guns not getting into the hands of criminals is moot. There are already too many guns in existence. You'd have a better chance of curing cancer by Tuesday than getting rid of all of them. And if the criminal can't get a gun, could he not get a knife or a baseball bat?

Point #4. I think you are totally off base with this one. Your statistical analogy touting a greater likelihood that you're better off without the gun is inaccurate. The anti-gun lobby uses this misconception often to try to convince people that it is true. Statistics can bolster anyone's cause. You can manipulate them to suit your own needs. Either side. I try not to use them unless they come from unbiased sources. All my guns are loaded and ready to use. I taught all my girls how to shoot and they all knew not to treat them as toys. Since they were allowed to shoot, they didn't find the need to experiment on their own. I don't think you need to worry too much about criminals using up all the range time to practice shooting. They learn from watching movies. It cracks me up when they turn the gun sideways when pointing it to act tough. Your comment about the increase in crime because there are more guns is flat out wrong. If you do a little searching, you will see that areas with armed citizens have a lesser crime rate.

A gun is a tool... an equalizing tool. There will always be a legitimate need for them. Answer truthfully... you can hear someone breaking the window downstairs. The news has been reporting home invasions where people are beat to death after being robbed. You have barricaded yourself and your family in one room and already called the police. You hear several different voices in your home. They begin to break down the door to the room you are in. Would you like to have a gun? There is more of a chance that this will happen before the possibility that you will accidentally shoot yourself or anyone else in your family.

To me, it's a whole lot better to have a gun and never need it than to need it and not have it.