quote:
but that doesn't preclude common sense gun control (guns out of the hands of small children, criminals, insane; required safety classes; and other stuff along those lines.

Except "common sense" is arbitrary and its use here is just a framing device. Isn't common sense to advocate for laws that are effective in their stated purpose? Do you advocate for laws that lack empirical evidence to support their passage?

quote:
especially with the evolution of weaponry since that time into more advanced killing machines.

So why does it matter to the 2A that technology advances when it doesn't matter to the 1A? Would you be more concerned about being shot by a .60 Cal musket ball vs a .223 Reminton bullet over the fact you were shot at all?

3 ...

Report Post

Posted by boosiebadazz

Member since Feb 2008

80548 posts

Posted on 5/20/14 at 1:58 pm to Clames

quote:
So why does it matter to the 2A that technology advances when it doesn't matter to the 1A? Would you be more concerned about being shot by a .60 Cal musket ball vs a .223 Reminton bullet over the fact you were shot at all?

The Founding Fathers envisioned the people to keep weapons on technological par as those the government had. Should that still be the case today?

0 ...

Report Post

Posted by Truckasaurus

Alabama

Member since May 2014

336 posts

Posted on 5/20/14 at 2:05 pm to Clames

quote:
Except "common sense" is arbitrary and its use here is just a framing device. Isn't common sense to advocate for laws that are effective in their stated purpose? Do you advocate for laws that lack empirical evidence to support their passage?

I've noticed the conservatives recently railing against the term "common sense." I don't quite get it.

I support keeping guns out of the hands of people that intend to use them for harm. If that somehows inadvertantly stops a non-criminal from getting a gun, then so be it. I don't think things like requiring background checks really prevents legal gun ownership.

quote:
So why does it matter to the 2A that technology advances when it doesn't matter to the 1A? Would you be more concerned about being shot by a .60 Cal musket ball vs a .223 Reminton bullet over the fact you were shot at all?

I was more referring to the capabilities to kill large amounts of people in a short amount of time. Even if there were a bunch of law-abiding armed folks around, I bet a person with ill-intent could still kill a few people before he or she was stopped.

1 ...

Report Post

Posted by deltaland