the guns that i had (sadly had to be left behind when we moved to Washington) were used for hunting

I feel safer having a gun and not having to use it than not having a gun and maybe having to use it

all of the bureaucracy you speak of, ofcourse will come with a monetary cost, administration fees, a new division of the government, and all manner of growth of the public sector, at the expense of the private sector

also, more people were killed with hammers than guns. shall we make people have to take hammer safety courses, go through a criminal record check, register all your hammers, and get a hammer-carry license? that way we can weed out some of the psychos who just walk into wal-mart and buy a hammer and kill 20 people http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xQX9WsscP6I&feature=youtu.be

you know why there are massacres? because it is a 'gun free' zone. as long as that doesn't change, there will be massacres. the bad guys will find a method to kill people. if the good guys have a method to stop the bad guys, there will be no problem.

illustration of my point http://www.secretsofthefed.com/solu.....rs-carry-guns/

other than putting everyone in bondage to where they are unable to use their arms and legs in a manner that is dangerous to others, how the hell do you think such massacres will stop?

also, please take a closer look at this. because apparently the concept was not something you grasped http://www.secretsofthefed.com/solu.....t-for-dummies/

gun control at what cost? where does the line in the sand get drawn? when we are all harmless bondage-mittened and hobbled sheep being herded around by our government overlords?

and i call bullshit on the gun control. i hear all manner of things about canadian mass stabbings, and other such fun things. the only way to have an entirely safe world, would be to pacify the populace through other means. and, such as i have illustrated, is absolutely ludicrous of a concept.

so? should sex toys be illegal, or even pornography because of it not having a useful purpose, and that it is sometimes used for illegal activities?

defense, sportsmanship, a protection against tyranny, just to have it? take your pick. it doesn't matter really because that isn't the point.

and, the majority of assault rifles aren't used for illegal purposes if you look at the amount of actual firearms in existence. so, same point as you just made. so, my point still stands! ban porn of all forms because of child-pornography, and ban dildos because someone somewhere might have used one to rape somebody.

lets say one has a gang of thugs attacking one, lets say, 8 people. anything with more than a 7 round clip is considered an 'assault' weapon in some aspects. so, unless this person is good enough of a shot to disable two guys with one shot, and hit their mark with the other shots to keep the rest of them at bay, who is to say what would happen to him? i guess that the theoretical person in such a situation would just have to throw his hands up in the air in defeat, since, it is illegal to have as many bullets in his defense of choice as were needed in such a situation.

ah, but that overrides the very argument you are trying to make, since, an assault weapon would clearly allow one to do so. at least in the fact that you yourself clearly have made such assumptions.

hide them? why?

see below for my reply

whoops, sorry, replied to the wrong reply. but, you get the point

how about we have the government just ban everything that could possibly be harmful to people then. actually, there are over double the amount of deaths from hands, weither via punching, or strangulation, than from all firearms. so, how about we make it a mandate that everyone who isn't 'permitted' to use their hands, have them wrapped up with fluffy mittens all the time?

so, you are illustrating my point? because the correct answer would ofcourse be to pull my own in defense, and cause the threat to be resolved. i would ask YOU the same question, since you seem to be the one on the side of the argument of which your own question seems more related.

hands kill more people, i am illustrating the absurdity of demanding regulation on something, by demanding regulation on other things of a similarly 'dangerous' sort. apparently the satyr of it was also lost on you

also, if i didn't happen to have an alternative method of defense, i would probably do the best i can with my 'bear hands' since, half the time, such people don't have the resolve to outright pull the trigger before someone has time to react.

the conclusions you jump to are absolutely astounding, but, yes, i am fairly certain that i am not going to have someone whip out an AK-47 on me. and, thus, i can quite easily walk down the street and buy a drink from a store, or whatever else i desired. to say that i am paranoid is almost as much of a begging-of-the-question as saying that my reaction to a decidedly ludicrous hypothetical situation, will result in a similarly ludicrous result

too stupid? i just don't like having the government encroach on my civil liberties. bad things do happen to good and innocent people, but, good people sleep well at night because bad people fear good people enacting harm upon them.

i would like to refer back to this one more time. since, it apparently didn't sink in http://www.secretsofthefed.com/solu.....t-for-dummies/

you missed one too when deleting. just trying to be helpful. also, gotta love it when someone runs out of ways to defend their point of view in an argument, and thus, resorts to declaring ignorance

ah, i see. well, i personally have rather enjoyed it. since, i am in the right, and holding to my beliefs in liberty and independence, of which is the core of which my country was founded upon. unnecessary regulation is an act of dependence, and thus an attack on liberty. that is as simple as it is at it's core. i'm sorry that my trying to persuade you to see that which i see plain as day, caused you to be upset, but, i have to think about it. because, unlike you, whatever transpires, may very well determine my fate in the future, just like all the people who voted for our current president may very well have endangered my livelyhood due to the economy not turning around like it would have, had a more conservative commander-in-chief been elected, among other offices of state of which are currently occupied by similarly liberal or socialist inclined individuals to that of our current president.

you missed this one when you were deleting everything <_<

THAT is some amazing backwards logic you have there. the intellectual dishonesty of even making that jump of conclusion is alarming. so, you are saying HE is a good guy? well, it isn't surprising i suppose.

here, since you clearly don't understand my more simplistic terms, here is a more lengthy quote “Good people sleep peaceably in their bed at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf”

how is defense through equally assured destruction flawed? it is the reason that the world isn't the site of far more nuclear blasts. peace and tranquility only exists through equal power, or the complete lack of power. and, if a murderer can get their hands on a gun, i am saying, so should a good upstanding citizen. so, i say either all or nothing. to be wishy washy about it is silly. we should either all be free men, or we should all be drones in a hive.

LOL. that was a good one, you have won the internet

Do you need a mil spec gun? Really something that can kill a room full of people in seconds, in the uk we hunt with rifles, you know and we get checks paper work and is highly illegal to breach them atall, after so many killing I thought people in the states would go. You know what we don't need full auto weapons or a 30 round mag

"No freeman shall be debarred the use of arms." Thomas Jefferson

or de-bear'd

=D

Ah~ XD i c what u did there XD


But yeah, my uncle told me all the fail safes the founding fathers put into place to prevent this crap...they are turning over in their graves right now.

I remember a friend of mine years ago got a call from a gun control group asking to help them with gun safety. He disagreed and got into a minor argument with them. Then, the caller talked about the 2nd amendment is not what it is now. My friend replies, "yeah, because it could have meant that we had to using bear arms." When I heard that, I laughed my head off. This reminds me of that moment. Thanks Limi. *hugs*

All gun laws would do is make it harder for law-abiding citizens to protect themselves. It doesn't deal with the idiots out there who 99% of the time illegally own a gun and use it violently.

Whoa... Guess a guy can't speak out against something anymore without getting battered. You can keep those gun laws in Canada. Good for Canada that it doesn't have as much crime. Americans will always love 3 things: Cars, guns, and food. That's especially true since our constitution protects our right to bear arms. We can't just let one person (Obama) take a right away from us. What's next? Hammers and clubs?

I was simply returning a favor.