Byron Quick
Moderator In Memoriam
Need? Need has absolutely nothing to do with the matter. The 2nd Amendments enumerates my right to own any weapons used by tactical military personnel. That includes crew served weapons and artillery if I can pay for them.
I'm not for controlling weapon access. Now, I am for controlling criminal and nutjobs access to weapons...by controlling the criminals and nutjobs. If society was run my way, the criminals and nutjobs would think twice about the use of a beltfed in a schoolyard. Because the school would have access to crew served weapons of its own and would blow the attacker to hell.
To the devil with trying to control tools. Use them to destroy those who would prey on the innocent.
Headline: Idiot attacks school with SAW. Neighbor with tank runs over him before dropping a 40mm grenade on his greasy remains. Film at 11!
Little criminal wannabes should grow up knowing that there is a heavily armed populace out there just chomping at the bit to kill people like them.
It's like the nutjobs that have 'anger management issues.' I've seen exactly two people who truly had this diagnosis by my criteria. Which is, if you stick a shotgun in the face of an extremely angry man and he doesn't calm right down then he has 'anger management issues.' But it's easily cured...pull the trigger.
Under my scenario, the supply of criminals and nutjobs would drop after a while. Loosen the self defense statutes, tighten the assault statutes, fight back and kill those who would prey on you and your kith and kin.
Don't get me wrong. I'll abide by the current law. Grudgingly. But I support broader definitions of what is self defense and narrowing the definitions of what constitutes assault. There are a lot of people charged with assault where the 'victim' darned well had it coming.
Violent criminals should never see the light of day that does not stream through the razor wire. If an individual cannot be trusted with weapons then that individual should not be trusted with, as a previous poster noted, bleach and ammonia. In other words, a person that cannot be trusted with weapons cannot be trusted with freedom. They should be killed in the act if possible and locked up forever if by some mischance they are captured alive.
I'm not for controlling weapon access. Now, I am for controlling criminal and nutjobs access to weapons...by controlling the criminals and nutjobs. If society was run my way, the criminals and nutjobs would think twice about the use of a beltfed in a schoolyard. Because the school would have access to crew served weapons of its own and would blow the attacker to hell.
To the devil with trying to control tools. Use them to destroy those who would prey on the innocent.
Headline: Idiot attacks school with SAW. Neighbor with tank runs over him before dropping a 40mm grenade on his greasy remains. Film at 11!
Little criminal wannabes should grow up knowing that there is a heavily armed populace out there just chomping at the bit to kill people like them.
It's like the nutjobs that have 'anger management issues.' I've seen exactly two people who truly had this diagnosis by my criteria. Which is, if you stick a shotgun in the face of an extremely angry man and he doesn't calm right down then he has 'anger management issues.' But it's easily cured...pull the trigger.
Under my scenario, the supply of criminals and nutjobs would drop after a while. Loosen the self defense statutes, tighten the assault statutes, fight back and kill those who would prey on you and your kith and kin.
Don't get me wrong. I'll abide by the current law. Grudgingly. But I support broader definitions of what is self defense and narrowing the definitions of what constitutes assault. There are a lot of people charged with assault where the 'victim' darned well had it coming.
Violent criminals should never see the light of day that does not stream through the razor wire. If an individual cannot be trusted with weapons then that individual should not be trusted with, as a previous poster noted, bleach and ammonia. In other words, a person that cannot be trusted with weapons cannot be trusted with freedom. They should be killed in the act if possible and locked up forever if by some mischance they are captured alive.
Last edited: