@spendius,
spendius wrote:What's absurd is having 300 millions of guns in circulation.
DAVID wrote:How 'd u address that??
Ask each of us to throw one of our guns in the garbage ?
spendius wrote:I address it by saying that the absurdity of banning kids, and felons who have done their time,
from having guns to defend themselves in the manner gun owners claim they need to be, would be avoided.
Thank u for replying to my question.
U have successfully cleared up and explained your thinking of your earlier posts.
Concerning criminals, it is my opinion that violent recidivists shud be long-term
ISOLATED from the decent people (preferably not on the North American Continent).
I agree that children and ex-criminals (
non-recidivists) who have served their time
shud not be disarmed because thay have defensive needs, like anyone else.
When I was a kid, if
my gun had been stolen (by government, or anyone)
I 'd have gotten another gun and continued to enlarge my collection.
(Some of us made them, just as a pass time; some were better gunsmiths than others.)
Some home-made guns, sold in gunstores, are
real beauties; fine works of art.
( Incidentally, let us bear in mind that sovereignty is in the citizens,
not in anything as low as a government, our mere hireling employee. )
spendius wrote:The one absurdity springs from the other.
Both are avoided, and other absurdities as well, by having gun owners
being ordered to turn all their guns in and, after an interval for the
logistics to be completed, it being a serious crime to be found in
possession of a gun unless authorised by the government.
Hay, I got an idea, Spendius:
Y not try that notion by having all owners of marijuana or heroin
be "ordered" to turn all of their drugs in and see how well that works out!??
What do u think? We can make heroin possession or cannabis possession a serious crime,
like the Rockefeller drug laws, right?? If that works out, then everyone who
does not care
about being able to defend his life or defend his family from the violence of man or beast
will simply get rid of his guns, right? Throw them in the garbage?
(Maybe we can "order" all owners of beer,
booze & ale to turn their alcohol in; yes?)
spendius wrote:As things stand gun owners can bushwhack
non gun owners and seemingly often do.
Does that tell us anything of the wisdom of the victims?????
Like people who refuse to use seatbelts ?
Walking around in public
un-armed is like drunken driving:
most likely u 'll get home OK, without crashing into anything,
but its
un-necessarily risky;
un-wise.
spendius wrote:Fighting it out with knives and baseball bats
would be far less costly to the economy.
Yea, will u see who u can convince to
DO that ?
I remember thinking, when I got out of the hospital after intestinal surgery in 2005,
that just (enfeebled) walking again was a challenge. I thought that I better not
get into any fights; a butterfly coud take me, without a defensive weapon.
spendius wrote:And it would provide a more equal playing field.
The victims would have a chance.
I do well just to be able to walk at all (not far).
Brawling with your chosen implements is not suitable for me.
My surgeon diagnosed me with: "at least 3" hernias;
(he was trying to sell me an implanted mesh).
I 've been counseled against any strain upon my abdominal wall,
e.g. lifting things or brawling with clubs. Hand-held revolvers r OK.
spendius wrote:The logic of the NRA leads to no other conclusion
than everybody being armed to the teeth.
For years, decades and centuries, we have eagerly embraced that philosophy.
I
love my gun collection. I always did. Al Gore was defeated (in his own State)
for the Presidency by people who share my point of vu qua survival and freedom.
Thanx again for your elucidation, Spendius.
David
