Quote:
Originally Posted by OhZone
Oh-k, I always love when gun peoples bring up cars, which require registration and licenses and regular inspections. And your license can be pulled if you drive drunk or in other circumstances. lulz
|
And I love this argument the anti-gun crowd brings up like you just did. First off, there is no constitutional right to a car. Secondly, you don't need regular inspections or the registration of your car if you don't use it on public roads. Your license can be pulled, but you can still get it back eventually (depending on certain factors) and you can still do damage later again. My car-argument is that they are objects that if used incorrectly then they can cause injury or death but it is the user's fault for such horrible acts, not the tool.
Quote:
Originally Posted by OhZone
And if assault weopons are already illegal, why are they being regularly sold? Oh-k, it's a matter of definition. You don't need to know the difference between one car and the other to know a tank isn't appropriate for most people.
Oh well.
|
Also not valid arguments. Just because something is illegal doesn't mean there isn't an illegal selling of them. Pot's illegal (in most of the US anyways) and people still do it. Just making something illegal and regulated doesn't mean there still won't be an illegal market for it. Gun bans disarm only one group of people: law-abiding citizens. Do you HONESTLY believe that when past gun bans went in effect, the criminals, mafioso, cartels, and so forth who were in the US turned in and/or registered their illegal weapons to abide by the law for their crime-committing?
"Good day youse police-guys. I'm here ta turn in my Thompson 1928 submachine gun cuz dey's illegal now. I'm only gonna commit crime with the guns that follow the new legislation of what's legal and what isn't now. Have a good day."
Comparing sporting rifles that have seemingly scary-looking features that have no relevance in the gun's ability to actually shoot to tanks is a poor analogy. How is a semi-only AK with a pistol grip and standard 30 round magazine vastly more dangerous than a stock-grip Saiga also chambered in 7.62x39mm possessing a low-capacity 10-round magazine? Now, people in favor of gun control could argue to just ban both guns. But then you're banning two guns both perfectly adequate for home-defense and for small game hunting (especially if the Saiga is chambered in other hunting rounds, and yes, you can swap out a Saiga's stock to give it a standard-looking AK pistol grip and stock).