Cenedril_Gildinaur wrote: |
So basically you are saying the reason the only people you will grant guns to are allowed it for no reason at all. And that assumes that people in the late 18th century used the early 21st century definition of militia, which they didn't.
Please don't put words in my mouth. What
I am saying is that criminals shouldn't be allowed to own handguns. I thought I made that extremely clear, and yet still you try to twist my words.
Cenedril_Gildinaur wrote: |
I enjoyed your list of restrictions. You want to make sure that those who you will deign to grant the privilege of gun ownership are not able to actually use the guns you are so generous in allowing them to own. On the other hand, a sensible attitue towards gun ownership that includes training is acceptable.
Again, the only restrictions on who could own a handgun under what I said are people who are not criminals or people who don't have a history of being violently mentally ill.
Do you think that people should just be able to own a gun without having to take classes on how to use it safely?
Do you think people should be able to just leave a gun lying around a house if there are children living there?
To me, it seems that you are confusing a high standard of responsibility with restrictions.
I don't have a problem with people being able to own or carry handguns. What I do have a problem with is people being allowed to own handguns with before a background check, without having had lessons on how to safely use the handgun, without having lessons on how to safely store the gun and being able to carry a gun concealed.
I have no problem whatsoever with people who own rifles for hunting.
A handgun is
meant to kill people. Considering I have never been able to be in a room with a handgun without feeling sick, and the one time I actually held a handgun, I threw up, I would say that I am pretty damned logical about the whole thing.
You debate this with people who think guns should be completely illegal.
I never realized that you would debate there any restrictions or standards of responsibility in ownership whatsoever.
This isn't like freedom of speech, where if someone says something mean, only feelings get hurt, or morals offended.
These are weapons meant for killing other humans where if someone does something mean or stupid with one, people get injured or killed.
No matter what arguments, logic, false logic, or propoganda is used, that doesn't change the fact that when you own a gun you own something that gives you the power of life and death.
So yes, when I vote for a government that gives random citizens the power of life and death over me when I walk down the street, I want there to be standards of who can own those guns. I want there to be standards of training that those owners must go through.
You can have your freedom to own a gun, but I want to have my freedom not to have be afraid of you because of that ownership.