OKLAHOMA ADOPTS A 2nd AMENDMENT DAY

Each good American
shoud petition his or her legislature to adopt a favorite State Handgun.





David

Why?
Seriously.
Handguns are a net loss to this Republic in terms of cost/benefit and

Joe(none of your favorites are made in any of the States)Nation

I deny your conclusion:
thay r valuable emergency equipment
that can enable a victim to get control
when he is threatened with predatory violence.

Every predatory event is a contest of power.

Predators wish to have a MONOPOLY of power.
Gun control grants to evil a monopoly of power over good victims.

I hope that future victims of the violence of man or beast
will have MORE POWER than the predators.





David

All nonsense, David.
Show proof that the presence of handguns has been a net benefit to this Republic.
I would say that if we all had to lug around blunderbusses, we'd be better off.
You still didn't supply the name and type of handgun you'd name to be State Handgun of New York.

Joe(maybe the .38 which was used to shoot nine in the Bronx last week)Nation

Can't argue with you there, Om.

US spending on military is more than the next 19 countries combined. [I stopped at 19 countries.]

=================

1 United States 687,105,000,000 4.7%

2 People's Republic of China 114,300,000,000 2.2%
3 France 61,285,000,000 2.5%
4 United Kingdom 57,424,000,000 2.7%
5 Russia 52,586,000,000 4.3%
6 Japan 51,420,000,000 1.0%
7 Germany 46,848,000,000 1.4%
8 Saudi Arabia 42,917,000,000 11.2%
9 Italy 38,198,000,000 1.8%
10 India 34,816,000,000 2.8%
11 Brazil 28,096,000,000 1.6%
12 South Korea 24,270,000,000 2.9%
13 Canada 20,164,000,000 1.5%
14 Australia 19,799,000,000 1.9%
15 Spain 15,803,000,000 1.1%
16 United Arab Emirates 15,749,000,000 7.3%
17 Turkey 15,634,000,000 2.7%
18 Israel 13,001,000,000 6.3%
19 Netherlands 11,604,000,000 1.5%
20 Greece 9,369,000,000

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_military_expenditures

==================

Could the math be right? If so, isn't that obscene, absolutely and unequivocally obscene.

Note too, many of the dictator clients of the US spend enormous sums on military. Probably they buy them from Russia though, right?

Having the means to CONTROL
an emergency, with life-saving results is not "nonsense".
I am perplexed that anyone woud consider it to be "nonsense".

If u had a handgun within reach
when u needed one, on an emergency basis,
tell me that u'd not take it; I 'm interested.
If not, then Y not ????




U ask me to do so on a collective basis; no, I 'll address it on an INDIVIDUAL basis,
from the perspective of a victim fighting for his life n property.
He needs to have predominant power. His life depends on it.

Y did u not indicate your reasoning,
supporting your conclusion of "All nonsense" ??????
I 'd like to know what it is.




When I needed mine,
I coud not have used a blunderbuss; obviously impracticable.
There was a time that going around unarmed was illegally irresponsible, about 3OO years ago;
(an earlier incarnation of the mandatory seatbelt filosofy).





OK: a .44 caliber revolver with a 2" barrel,
loaded with hollowpointed slugs, with W-I-D-E cavities.






No; (I 've never heard of a 9 round .38).
Anyway, history has proven that the STOPPING POWER a .38 is unreliable; irresponsibly unreliable.





David