Do we NEED guns? (evolution, America, pagan, Zen)

[robtex]

Originally Posted by Darkdale

I don't concider RPGs to be guns, so I'd have no problems with those being banned. I also think Tanks, Attack Aircraft and Nuclear Submarines should be banned from public use as well.

sarcasm aside, what is your stance on banning m16's ak 47's mac 10's uzis, m60's sawed off shotguns (which are currently illegal), glock pistols with 30 round clips spas 12 shotguns .

[Darkdale]

Originally Posted by robtex

sarcasm aside, what is your stance on banning m16's ak 47's mac 10's uzis, m60's sawed off shotguns (which are currently illegal), glock pistols with 30 round clips spas 12 shotguns .

I think they should all be legal.

[robtex]

Originally Posted by Darkdale

I think they should all be legal.

I think they should be illegal for the following reasons:

1) By law they cannot be used for sport hunting

2) the ones like the m16 that can be converted to single shot 223 rifles can be converted back to assult rifles

3) They can mow down an army of people in seconds

4) There primary reason for existance is killing human beings.

DD, may I ask why you feel they should be legal?

[Darkdale]

Originally Posted by robtex

DD, may I ask why you feel they should be legal?

Because I think that most weapons should be legal, as a right. I believe that weapons are essential to liberty.

[MdmSzdWhtGuy]

Politicians want to outlaw weapons, especially assault weapons, because it is much easier to control an unarmed populace.

No guns in the hands of citizens means any gov't. ours or others can make the masses do whatever they want, with impunity.

That is the reason for the second amendment. Has nothing to do with hunting.

B.

[Scott1]

Originally Posted by MdmSzdWhtGuy

Politicians want to outlaw weapons, especially assault weapons, because it is much easier to control an unarmed populace.

No guns in the hands of citizens means any gov't. ours or others can make the masses do whatever they want, with impunity.

I'm not sure if someone already brought this up... but, assault weapons aint gonna help you if the government wants to "control" with "impunity". You take your AK-47, and I'll be the guy with the fake smile and sign that says "I love Bush" standing behind the M1A1 Tank!

[Darkdale]

Originally Posted by Scott1

I'm not sure if someone already brought this up... but, assault weapons aint gonna help you if the government wants to "control" with "impunity". You take your AK-47, and I'll be the guy with the fake smile and sign that says "I love Bush" standing behind the M1A1 Tank!

You assume the military would side with the government? Our military often dislikes our government, as they feel they are misused. No, the military is loyal to the Constitution above all and that puts them on the side of the people. The military may split, but I think most of the military would support the people. I know many people in the military that would be willing to fight for the liberty of the people, against a tyrannical government.

[fromthe heart]

I answered yes to teh questions of do we need guns....It's more humane to hunt with something that pretty much assures a kill and not a run off and suffer to death thing.


If we did not have guns someone would just remake one and it would start all over again so it should be a question of what kind of guns should we have...that's just MPO.

[robtex]

Originally Posted by Darkdale

You assume the military would side with the government? Our military often dislikes our government, as they feel they are misused. No, the military is loyal to the Constitution above all and that puts them on the side of the people. The military may split, but I think most of the military would support the people. I know many people in the military that would be willing to fight for the liberty of the people, against a tyrannical government.

So you are saying our govement is tyrannical and you need an automatic weapon because having such an instrument is essential to your liberty?