The Coalition to Prevent Assault Weapon Violence.
Good stuff. ;)
Just want to say that that is beautiful.
We could do the same with a nuclear weapon: put it in a corner and wait for it to cause mass destruction on its own, thus proving that nuclear weapons are safe in anyone’s hands.
Conservatives need to take what they can get, Tim. Clever really isn’t a byword over on that side of things.
You know, the “cars are somtimes used for bad purposes too you know” argument is a lot less dumb.
Turns out that accountability is a progressive value…
It would be really funny if somebody got a hold of one of those microwave beams that the Air Force is developing and aimed it at the magazine from across the street when somebody was on cam.
Which would do . . . what exactly? If it were a hotdog, it might do something, but microwaves need water to do their business.
H.
But of course, that’s not the argument, is it? No one ever said guns were safe in (just) anyone’s hands. Only you said that, so you could seem like you’re making an argument when you’re not. I haven’t heard any conservatives, for instance, calling for the restoration of gun ownership rights to convicted felons. If anyone is for that, in fact, it’s the not-particularly-clever-themselves liars on the other side.
What conservatives argue is that the universal option to own guns is safer for the people than the prohibition against owning them. The reason is that, a) if the federal government can’t be trusted with citizen ownership of guns, it certainly can’t be trusted without it, and b) when guns are illegal, law abiding citizens are left defenseless against criminals who, by definition, have no qualms about possessing them. I’m sure you know this, but I have to repeat it yet again since you have lied about it yet again.
If the federal government can’t be trusted with citizen ownership of nuclear weapons, it certainly can’t be trusted without it, and when nuclear weapons are illegal, law abiding citizens are left defenseless against criminals who, by definition, have no qualms about possessing them.
Besides the fact that a nuclear weapon is about x8000 times more complicated then making a gun, or that there are several million guns already in circulation, that’s a good analogy.
Why should we take into account how complicated a weapon is to make when determining who should be allowed to own one?
You also forgot the scale difference. In terms of raw damage possible, a gun is statistically more comparable to scissors than it is to WMD.
You also forgot the scale difference. In terms of raw damage possible, a gun is statistically more comparable to scissors than it is to WMD.[/quote]
Ok, so… where is the line drawn?
You also forgot the scale difference. In terms of raw damage possible, a gun is statistically more comparable to scissors than it is to WMD.[/quote]
Ok, so… where is the line drawn?[/quote]
I don’t want anyone owning weapons capable of indiscriminate area destruction. If someone really needs a big explosive they can do like all the other nutballs and build it themselves from a recipe on the internet.
Why should we take into account how complicated a weapon is to make when determining who should be allowed to own one?[/quote]
If a weapon is easy to make, it’s easy to make it illegally. All you need to make a gun is a lathe.
Why should we take into account how complicated a weapon is to make when determining who should be allowed to own one?[/quote]
If a weapon is easy to make, it’s easy to make it illegally. All you need to make a gun is a lathe.[/quote]
Er… criminals don’t usually make their own guns…
That’s cause good guns are easily available. If that changed, a blackmarket gunsmith might be able to do real well for herself.
[quote=“Nick_Walter”]
That’s cause good guns are easily available. If that changed, a blackmarket gunsmith might be able to do real well for herself.[/quote]
So you’re saying that any weapon should be legal if it could realistically be homemade?
That’s cause good guns are easily available. If that changed, a blackmarket gunsmith might be able to do real well for herself.[/quote]
So you’re saying that any weapon should be legal if it could realistically be homemade?[/quote]
Well, outlawing it would be ineffective if it was easily homemade. People who wanted one would get one regardless of the law.