scared? wrote:Lol a gun is insurance? Wtf are these morons afraid of?...
I was drawing a comparison that represents my opinion on guns for self defense. I understand you don't agree based on the idea that I'm afraid of something. But on the other hand you pay for health insurance in case something happens and you need assistance leveling the the playing field. You aren't necessarily walking around all the time afraid that something bad is going to happen with your health. But you carry insurance just in case.
YourGrandpa wrote:You have your opinion and I have mine. We disagree. I'm fine with that.
lol it's not Puff's opinion. It's reality.
If I told you the sky was blue would that be "my opinion"? Like global warming and evolution you can't simply wish that facts would go away if you ignore them or don't "believe" in them.
No wonder rednecks are so hard to get through to...they think that, like themselves, everybody bases reality on what they prefer it to be.
Last edited by GONNAFISTYA on Tue Dec 18, 2012 9:28 pm, edited 1 time in total.
GONNAFISTYA wrote:
No wonder rednecks are so hard to get through to...they think that, like themselves, everybody bases reality on what they prefer it to be.
that had never occurred to me but would explain so much...
lol then you've never seen anything from Fox or Sun News, because that's all they do day in day out: make their own reality so they can cope with the big, bad universe and it's "liberal bias".
That’s right, even according to Connecticut state law, which The Brady Campaign To Prevent Gun Violence ranks as 5th strongest in the nation, allows for the possession of a semiautomatic assault-style rifle with a grenade launcher, as long as it doesn’t also have one of these features:
A folding or telescoping stock;
A pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon;
A bayonet mount;
A flash suppressor or threaded barrel designed to accommodate a flash suppressor
You’re allowed to have any one of those features on your semiautomatic rifle, but not two of them, so if you want to fire bullets as fast as you can pull the trigger and launch grenades, and use a bayonet, you’re out of luck.
HM-PuFFNSTuFF wrote:A gun isn't insurance. You're ten times more likely to use it on a family member or yourself than you are on an intruder.
I'm not going to kill a family member or myself. So how does this apply to me? I'm all for additional requirements before allowing someone to own a firearm. I'd be happy to attend mandatory training courses, continued education, aptitude and/or mental stability testing. Because I am a perfectly capable and responsible gun owner.
You're obviously upset over something you have no control. I think our gun laws need more reforms. But banning guns is never going to be the answer, in America (at least as long as we're alive). We need to start with more education. Maybe some day that education will turn into something more. But I support the fundamental intent of the 2nd amendment. And as long as I am legally allowed to own a fire arm, I will.
Like a true American, the fundamental point is that gun ownership has detrimental effect on society as a whole, it's looking at the bigger picture instead of the end of your yard.
[color=red] . : [/color][size=85] You knows you knows [/size]
I don't know why people try to express their point of view with people like gramps. He's part of the problem. You may as well buy a fully tacked out assault rifle and shoot A4 paper with it.