Club Xterra O.G.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
||Thread Tools||Display Modes|
Just gonna end my rant quietly now with Ben Franklin's Quote:
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
1) I am not afraid of being attacked, even though I currently own zero firewarms. However, it does happen. There is a potential need for more than 7 bullets (though extremely rare). However, the biggest part that I disagree with is that there is no way to enforce this limit on people that want to commit crimes. These type of limits are reactionary, and don't address the root cause. What is the difference between the millions of people with 30 round magazines that NEVER commit a crime, and the very FEW that do? Focus needs to be on an organized and factual root cause analysis/design of experiments to identify risk factors, and how to determine who should pass a background check and who shouldn't. I am more for consistent restrictions on WHO can get things...not as much on WHAT.
I, as a non 'clinging to guns and religion' type of person, would gladly give up the right to a 30 round magazine if I, honest to God, thought it would actually have a measurable effect on gun violence.
2) I don't see how that makes bullying seem nice. Many people are bullied and don't shoot people. Many people take bullying or negative aspects of their life and use it for motivation to do positive things. Everyone is still responsible for their own actions, regardless of external factors.
I don't see myself being a problem, or anything that I have said. It all seems logical to me. If you have a logical dissenting opinion, I am always more than willing to listen/read...however stating that I have a problem for having a (presumably) different opinion is not appreciated.
|Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)|