|
Pulpsmack -> RE: Then Amend the Constitution (12/18/2012 4:32:26 PM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: ServosCor
I think you would be hard pressed to find anyone with an ounce of compassion not still mourning those lost in this tragedy.
Agreed.
quote:
As a gun owner/carrier I will say I am all for banning assult type rifles at this point in time. If we examine the facts of recent shooting massacre's, many of them were committed with weapons similar to the Bushmaster .223/ Is there a real and logical reason that any citizen needs such a weapon for home protection? None that I can think of. Educate me, please, if I am mistaken.
As a gun owner/carrier non-victim who has used his CCW in self defense, I disagree entirely. If we examine the facts of recent shooting massacres, many of the were in fact committed with weapons similar to the Bushmaster .223. And if by happenstance or better yet, nefarious design, the rash of shootings developed where the shooter emulated a video game character who carried 4 Colt Peacemaker Cowboy-style revolvers, is that then acceptable grounds to ban Colt Peacemaker revolver from private ownership? Would you then make an argument that the Colt peacemaker revolver is an antiquated design no-longer in use by any law enforcement or military and as such put forth the challenge for people to justify its necessity or subject it to banning merely because some idiots employed as a weapon of choice?
Thus, on the merits of this argument you must understand one thing... there is no burden of proof the gun owner must fulfill to justify the possession/ownership of a legal weapon, but rather a burden of proof must exist as to why that weapon in specific (or class in general) must be banned from legal possession. If in fact there is no compelling reason (other than it killed people, which is what most antis claim is true of "any gun's purpose") then there is no need to justfy owning them whatsoever.
That said, before and after the passage/lapsing of the Assault weapons Ban, there have been necesitous circumstances whereby a private citizen had a need of such rifles. The best example is the Asian store owners in the LA riots, who used these rifles to defend their livelihoods from looting and arson. Another good example was Hurricane Katrina where there was a widespread governmental collapse at the local AND federal level and many US citizens there were plunged into anarchy for a period of days. Finally, there is the North Hollywood shootout where the Armed Robbers, sporting Auto-converted AK rifles and body armor pummelled through the police defenses. Police armed with 9mm pistols were unable to pierce the body armor. It was not until the police stopped at a local gun store and borrowed these AR15 from the store to turn the tide and defeat these armored assailants whose weapons and armor were illegal yet still obtained and used.
quote:
I do stand strong in my belief that the responsible, sane citizens of our country do have need and right to protect themselves when faced with evil such as the likes of Lanza and those who choose to cause harm to the law abiding citizens of America. Our media loves to hype up and drown us in print and pics when these shootings occur. Funny, they don't seem as inclined to trumpet the news of a citizen exercising his right to protect his family w/ his legally purchased firearms.
just my humble opinion.
Agreed there.
|
|
|
|
