10-20-2022, 07:24 PM
(This post was last modified: 10-20-2022, 07:31 PM by Eric the Green.)
Want a gun to protect you from criminals, Jason? Or from violent police?
A gun is unsafe unless not loaded and locked away. Whereupon it is useless if a criminal or a violent cop invades your property.
A shootout with a criminal or cop with you using an unsafe and ready to use gun is unlikely to work in your favor.
For a criminal invading your property without a gun, shooting him might make you guilty of a crime and you might be convicted. And better means of defense include mace, stun gun, alarms, locks, dogs, martial arts, fences, moving to a safer neighborhood, etc.
It is better to rely on 9-11 and the police than on easily-available guns. The more people rely on guns, the more guns are available to criminals. They can borrow or steal them or buy them anywhere in the USA. The more our society becomes a violent anarchy where no-one is safe. The more violent the police become too. Red states are verging on such conditions already.
Guns are possibly useful if you are fighting a civil war. In that case, the gun owner would in my opinion need to turn over their gun to the army of the the state, alternative state or state-in-exile, depending which you support. If ready, you could join the army.
The 2nd Amendment protects your right to bear arms only if you are part of a well-regulated militia in which its members must bring their own weapons, as was the case 230 years ago. It is not the case today; we have well-regulated militias that issue guns to its members. They are called the police and the national guard.
The 2nd Amendment protects an individual's right to bear arms only since the current Republican Supreme Court so wrongly decided. We should elect Democrats who will appoint Justices who will restore the proper interpretation.
The nation and states could still pass measures permitting gun ownership even if the 2nd Amendment is repealed or if Justices interpret it correctly again. The 2nd Amendment does not say that no-one can own firearms if this Amendment did not exist. But states and the nation could enact such gun control measures it deemed necessary if the Amendment were repealed. And such measures are desperately needed. The 2nd Amendment by the same token does not prohibit all gun control, according to the Supreme Court.
A gun is unsafe unless not loaded and locked away. Whereupon it is useless if a criminal or a violent cop invades your property.
A shootout with a criminal or cop with you using an unsafe and ready to use gun is unlikely to work in your favor.
For a criminal invading your property without a gun, shooting him might make you guilty of a crime and you might be convicted. And better means of defense include mace, stun gun, alarms, locks, dogs, martial arts, fences, moving to a safer neighborhood, etc.
It is better to rely on 9-11 and the police than on easily-available guns. The more people rely on guns, the more guns are available to criminals. They can borrow or steal them or buy them anywhere in the USA. The more our society becomes a violent anarchy where no-one is safe. The more violent the police become too. Red states are verging on such conditions already.
Guns are possibly useful if you are fighting a civil war. In that case, the gun owner would in my opinion need to turn over their gun to the army of the the state, alternative state or state-in-exile, depending which you support. If ready, you could join the army.
The 2nd Amendment protects your right to bear arms only if you are part of a well-regulated militia in which its members must bring their own weapons, as was the case 230 years ago. It is not the case today; we have well-regulated militias that issue guns to its members. They are called the police and the national guard.
The 2nd Amendment protects an individual's right to bear arms only since the current Republican Supreme Court so wrongly decided. We should elect Democrats who will appoint Justices who will restore the proper interpretation.
The nation and states could still pass measures permitting gun ownership even if the 2nd Amendment is repealed or if Justices interpret it correctly again. The 2nd Amendment does not say that no-one can own firearms if this Amendment did not exist. But states and the nation could enact such gun control measures it deemed necessary if the Amendment were repealed. And such measures are desperately needed. The 2nd Amendment by the same token does not prohibit all gun control, according to the Supreme Court.