Haha, nope. That promotes violence just like video games and war movies.muy_thaiguy wrote:So, no paintball or airguns that are semi or fully automatic?Frigidus wrote:Hologram wrote:If someone can either produce a nuclear bomb on their own or the military is stupid enough to sell one on the open market (stealing is still against the law and therefore if they obtain it that way they shouldn't have it) then I'm all for allowing them to have it. However, I would probably move far away from any urban areas.heavycola wrote:Hologram wrote:Going with the U.S. (as I assume that this what it's pointed to) the Constitution should be interpreted at face value. The 2nd Amendment isn't that ambiguous. We have the right to bear arms. The only area of ambiguity is how powerful the guns we allow people to have are. In my personal opinion, there shouldn't be control over that aspect. If someone wants to spend thousands of dollars on a .50 cal. machine gun bought from military surplus, they should be allowed to.
On that note however, I believe there should be gun control in the sense that we don't want just everyone running around with weapons. Background checks, permits, and the whole nine yards should be enforced so as not to put those .50 cal. machine guns into the hands of some crazed killer out to shoot hundreds of people just because.
Anyway, that's my argument, and I think I'm gonna go sleep now.
So nuclear weapons would be OK for people to own? For self0defence, obviously. What about cluster bombs?
Would the kids who shot up all those other kids in columbine, Virginia tech etc have been flagged up with background checks? Would their parents?
And woudl teh worl dbe a sfare place if everyone had guns? Even if aonly governmt-approved™ owners had guns, would that make it easier or harder for whackos to get hold of them?
You are wrong in that sense. I'm sorry, but there is literally no argument for allowing nuclear weapons. What the hell are they going to use it for? Anyways, while banning guns altogether is a bad call I'm for banning semi-automatic (and automatic, naturally) weaponry. Frankly, for the US at least, no matter what you realistically possess, the government has the technology to take you out from a mile away. If the government wanted to repress us they could. So the only thing those weapons will ever be used for is killing other humans en masse. Anything that isn't semi-automatic is sometimes used for hunting (and is more than enough for self defense) so should be allowed. That's just my two cents.
