A compromise to gun free zones.

Maccabee · Oct 15, 2018

Rich2018 said:
If your child is killed by a defective toy or a negligent gun shot, they're still dead.

So you're OK with banning toys that are dangerous to children...and that might kill one or two children a year because of say a potential choking hazard.
BUT you're not OK with banning something that kills over 10,000 people (including children) per year?

Can you really not see a double standard in banning dangerous toys and guns ?

I know what you're going to say at this point, would I ban kitchen knives and cars. And of course no I wouldn't because they're as safe as we can make them and no safer alternative is available for something that is needed.

Privately owned firearms are not needed.
Though you could make a special case for shotguns being used for vermin/pest control by farmers etc.

We've discussed this before, in order to ban guns you need to repeal the 2nd Amendment.

This requires another amendment to the Constitution so no, under these circumstances gun ownership would NOT be constitutionally protected.

Getting too close huh ?

Would you also like to see people who wish to ban potentially dangerous toys treated as pariahs ?
If no, why not ?

To answer the question about defective toys, the key word is "defective." In other words, something in the manufacturing process made it not work properly. A firearm is made for hunting, self defense, target practicing, and to deter a tyrannical government. If someone uses it in a crime or accidentally shoots someone, that is the fault of the user, not the manufacturer. Hammers are designed to pound nails, yet its also used to commit murder.

Rich2018 · Oct 16, 2018

Maccabee said:
To answer the question about defective toys, the key word is "defective." In other words, something in the manufacturing process made it not work properly. A firearm is made for hunting, self defense, target practicing, and to deter a tyrannical government. If someone uses it in a crime or accidentally shoots someone, that is the fault of the user, not the manufacturer. Hammers are designed to pound nails, yet its also used to commit murder.

One word - Potential

The way that certain toys made in the Far East are made, creates the potential to kill.
So they are banned

Guns have far greater potential to kill. Yet in the USA they are not banned.

Just out of interest, how do guns deter a "tyrannical government" ?

TurtleDude · Oct 16, 2018

Rich2018 said:
One word - Potential

The way that certain toys made in the Far East are made, creates the potential to kill.
So they are banned

Guns have far greater potential to kill. Yet in the USA they are not banned.

Just out of interest, how do guns deter a "tyrannical government" ?

its really idiotic to compare toys-which are designed to be used by children vs weapons. period.

Maccabee · Oct 17, 2018

Rich2018 said:
One word - Potential

The way that certain toys made in the Far East are made, creates the potential to kill.
So they are banned

Guns aren't toys. To use your logic, cars have an even greater potential of killing children. Should we ban them?

Guns have far greater potential to kill. Yet in the USA they are not banned.

Because the benefits outweigh the risks.

Just out of interest, how do guns deter a "tyrannical government" ?

Dictators always disarms it's populance. By having an armed citizenry, governments think twice before turning tyrannical. It also goes beyond an armed citizenry. By having a strong military, we deter tyrannical governments from invading our soil.

A compromise to gun free zones.

Maccabee

Rich2018

TurtleDude

warrior of the wetlands

Maccabee

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency