On 4/18/13 11:13 PM, Dave wrote:
On Thu, 18 Apr 2013 22:54:38 -0500, -MIKE-
I can also point out that there are a thousand times more deaths by
automobile, but no one is banning them. There are hundreds of times more
deaths from baseball bats and hammers, but no one is trying to ban them.

And your replay is feeble. Automobiles, baseball bats, hammers,
whatever else everyday item you want to present, usually have other
uses and originated with a different purpose.

Perhaps you should read this.
http://www.snopes.com/politics/guns/baseballbats.asp


Then look up knives. And WTF does the original purpose of something have
to do with its ability to kill. Aren't the lives takes the reason
everyone wants to band guns?


Firearms originated with just one purpose. The first maker of a gun
didn't just think one day, "Hmmm, think I'll make gun for target
shooting". Instead he thought, "I'll make a gun to kill some animal or
go kill someone in a fight".

In any event, when all other argument fails, people in the US fall
back on the second amendment. That was several hundred years ago.
Society was considerably different then. I'd suggest that the second
amendment is out of date in today's society.


When the 1st Amendment was written all we have was a printing press and
it took a month for new to get across the country. We now have the
internet and instant press across the world. Should we limit the 1st
Amendment because of that.


But, I understand the want to keep it. It's like anything else.
Someone gave you something and you're damned if anybody is going to
take it away from you. Guess you're going to have to find some other
method to handle your gun crimes.


It's an inalienable right, as understood by the authors of the
constitution.
The only one who gave it to us was our creator.

But why am I arguing with a Canadian?


--

-MIKE-

"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com

---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply