(Quote) Chelsea-743484 said:
I don't agree with you 100%, but to some degree, I do.I don't have any problem ...
(Quote) Chelsea-743484 said:
I don't agree with you 100%, but to some degree, I do.
I don't have any problem with the government wanting firearms for carry to be licensed and such, just like driving privileges are licensed. I think that it's a pipe-dream, however, to think that one is limiting firearms for the intention of preventing criminals to get ahold of firemarms. It seems to me a waste of tax payer money to attempt to go that route.
I am not for your hyperbolic statement :P that the government then should hand out guns to everyone everywhere as a logical conclusion. I take it as a joke.
Besides that, our representatives may be democratically elected, but the supreme court justices and president are not...and all of them make law to some degree. America is a very weird place...people think that the wild west died...but it seems to me very much alive in the American philosophy taught in school, music and on TV. Just listen to old cowboy/country-western songs and you'll get a taste of it. In a way it's a philosophy about as ingrained as Islam is in Muslims...which can hardly be dealt with on a rational level.
Well at least you're on the right path towards agreeing with me
As I've said, it's not so much the more restrictive gun laws that I promote, but moreso the attitude surrounding them. I think that just having more guns makes it easier for criminals to get a hold of them - both those criminals who are actively seeking to acquire guns, as well as, and probably moreso, those people who can cause more serious damage quickly due to their easy access to guns.
Speaking to Meg's comment...Yes, there are lots of other weapons that can be obtained or made, but generally, there are not many, if any, other weapons that can be easily obtained or made that cause the same amount of damage to human health and life as guns. As an example, with the recent Sandy Hook shootings, if the mother of the shooter had not had such a large supply of guns, the shooter quite likely might've tried to go on a rampage, but the damage he could do with another weapon (say a knife or machete) is likely much less than he was able to do with a gun.
I may be wrong, but I thought you guys voted specifically for the president?? I know here in Canada we do not vote directly for our Prime Minister. And it may be a bit more indirectly, but if you do vote for the president, and the president appoints the supreme court justices, there is still some degree of democracy to that process (i.e. if you don't like the supreme court justices your president appoints, maybe that's a sign you voted for the wrong president, though I recognize this is a longer term thing to try to change, and it is more difficult when the people who are elected are not honest about their intentions)
And yes, my comment about handing out guns to everyone everywhere was definitely hyperbolic and a joke, but it was intended to make a point though too. :)
I think it was a brave, but pretty accurate comparison you made of Americans to Muslims. Kudos to you for that
I'll have to listen to some Johnny Horton tonight...I remember listening to a cassette of his when I was a kid, but I likely didn't realize the politicalness of his music as a 10 year old :)