Quote:

Quote:

Very true Marv. I support your right to not want to own a gun.

The question is, do you support my right to own one? Probably not.

So it all boils down to a group of people wanting to take the rights of another group of people away.

Bob



With respect, there are gaping logical flaws in this argument as the two rights in question are very different in nature.

Citizen A claims the right not to bear arms. This choice has no directly lethal or potentially lethal effect on anyone. The citizen who exercises this right represents no threat to anyone.
There is not a single state, regime or government in the world that would challenge a citizen's right not to bear firearms.

Citizen B claims the right to bear arms. This means he could, potentially:
- shoot himself, whether intentionally or by accident
- shoot others, whether intentionally or by accident
- have his firearm (through accidental discovery, sale or, more likely, theft) fall into the hands of someone less prudent -and more trigger happy- than himself

Clearly, these two 'rights' cannot therefore be viewed as being similar.



Marc,
I have to correct this. Our 'Bill of Rights', Article II, allows for gun ownership. Citizen A does not 'claim a right not to bear arms', as there is no 'Right' in our Bill of Rights as such. He may CHOOSE, by his or her own volition not to own or have a firearm, and that is perfectly acceptable. However, it is not a 'Right' not to own one, it is simply a choice. On the other hand, no one is forcing a gun into anyone's hand, either. If that *were* the case, then there may be due and just cause for a Right to Refuse a Firearm. Even you have said 'this choice' and 'choice' and 'right' are two vastly different things. However, since the Prohibition Amendment to our Constitution was repealed, that does allow you the 'right', within prescribed laws, to drink and consume alcohol. So, let us say that a 21 year old, licensed individual in the United States, a person who legally can operate a motor vehicle and a person who can legally consume alcohol, decides to do both at one.

Would you consider that a directly lethal or potentially lethal effect on anyone? I most certainly would.
Now, Citizen A claims the 'right' to consume alcohol and to operate a motor vehicle. Is he outside of the law? Maybe, maybe not. It all depends on his blood alcohol level, but those who fight against drunk driving claim, and I believe rightfully so, that 'impairment begins with the first drink.'

So, let's say that our driver has kicked back a couple, and his BAC (Blood Alcohol Content) is 0.079%. In the state of Washington, he is NOT considered 'Driving under the influence', even though he may be impaired.

He could potentially,
Have an accident and injure or kill himself
Have an accident and injure or kill others
Have his motor vehicle stolen by others who may be more or less impaired them himself and have them potentially injure or kill others.

I'm sorry, for everything you can come up with, I can come up with something else that falls to the same end point but without a gun.

Guns scare people because people don't understand guns, the responsibility of guns, and the care and use of guns. They have seen for most of their life that they are dangerous, loud, lethal, and often used to kill people, and will put you in jail.

There is no, nor can there be, any statistic, but I must wonder out of all the rounds of ammunition fired in a single period of year by civilian and law enforcement (but not military), what percentage of those actually strike and hurt, maim, or kill anyone or anything. The reason for 'anything' is that I would include hunting in that as well. How many things die per year as a total percentage of actual ammunition fired. Then, I would love to see the total number of people hurt, maimed or killed in that same year versus total cars and miles driven per year.

Gary

I'm blessed watching God do what He does best. I've had a few rough years, and I'm still not back to where I want to be, but I'm on the way and things are looking far better now than what they were!