The Firing Line Forums - View Single Post

stephen426 · June 15, 2014, 09:19 AM

@Winchster,

Read the graph you posted. It says victims aged 12 and over. Also, your graph is at lest 4 years old.

Regarding the argument "Shall not be infringed", do you truly believe that means everything goes? When the constitution was ratified in 1791, flint-lock guns were still being used. The Colt revolver wasn't even invented for another 44 years. Fast forward to modern day weapons with high capacity magazines and fully automatic weapons. The destructive force is exponentially greater than what the founding fathers probably could have ever imagined. Do you honestly believe that fully automatic weapons should be readily available to anyone? What about explosive devices? Why not make nukes available to anyone if you don't want your rights infringed upon? Oh, and what about children's rights? Should they not have the right to keep and bear arms since they are less capable of defending themselves against a full grown adult?

While I know some will argue that very few crimes are committed with automatic weapons, I would argue that is because of their relative scarcity. If Holmes or Lanza had fully automatic weapons, I can guaranty that the casualties would have been much higher.

June 15, 2014, 09:19 AM	#40
stephen426 Senior Member Join Date: March 11, 2005 Posts: 3,840	@Winchster, Read the graph you posted. It says victims aged 12 and over. Also, your graph is at lest 4 years old. Regarding the argument "Shall not be infringed", do you truly believe that means everything goes? When the constitution was ratified in 1791, flint-lock guns were still being used. The Colt revolver wasn't even invented for another 44 years. Fast forward to modern day weapons with high capacity magazines and fully automatic weapons. The destructive force is exponentially greater than what the founding fathers probably could have ever imagined. Do you honestly believe that fully automatic weapons should be readily available to anyone? What about explosive devices? Why not make nukes available to anyone if you don't want your rights infringed upon? Oh, and what about children's rights? Should they not have the right to keep and bear arms since they are less capable of defending themselves against a full grown adult? While I know some will argue that very few crimes are committed with automatic weapons, I would argue that is because of their relative scarcity. If Holmes or Lanza had fully automatic weapons, I can guaranty that the casualties would have been much higher. __________________ The ATF should be a convenience store instead of a government agency!