Date: 2014-10-27 04:47 pm (UTC)
So, because I like poking wasps' nests, I have to ask: How is requiring training of the entirety of humanity in gun safety more reliable than, say, removing guns from the market entirely?

And please do not bring up the "Well, cars kill people too, and everyone gets trained in those," argument. Cars are not designed to kill people. Guns are. A gun's only use is to kill things. I'd say "only intended use" but I honestly can't think of another thing that guns are useful for. Hunting? That's killing. Defending your country? Also killing. I guess maybe "threatening/scaring everyone" might be a use, but that's not really USING the gun.

Keep in mind: I know gun owners. I know gun owners who carry, and I know people who hunt as well. If removing their guns saves a classroom of elementary/middle/high (geezus, how sad is it that I can say ALL of those have had shootings) school students, church goers, shoppers at malls, etc., from therapy for the rest of their lives -- or, in the case of far too many kids, LIVING the rest of their lives -- frankly? I'm totally okay with that.

The Second Amendment wasn't written with modern day guns in mind. You'd have to try REALLY HARD to kill someone with a gun in 1776.
This account has disabled anonymous posting.
If you don't have an account you can create one now.
HTML doesn't work in the subject.
More info about formatting

Profile

dalesql: (Default)
dalesql

January 2021

S M T W T F S
     12
3 456789
10111213141516
17181920212223
24252627282930
31      

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Aug. 7th, 2025 06:12 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios