View Single Post
Old 01-15-2013, 02:56 AM   #800
cutthemdown
A verbis ad verbera
 
cutthemdown's Avatar
 
Zimm to HOF

Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Long Beach
Posts: 36,860
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BroncoInferno View Post
That doesn't answer my question: where are the gun nuts willing to draw line regarding the ownership of "arms?" And what is their rationale for drawing that line? Or are they not willing to draw any line at all (i.e. anything can be owned under the umbrella of "arms")? I hear plenty of complaints about "infringing on their rights," but basically nothing regarding what "arms" control (if any) they are willing to accept. Tell us what's acceptable in your view and explain the rationale, and we can work from there.
They aren't nuts. There is nothing crazy about liking to own firearms. The line that is drawn is fine right now. We already have sensible gun laws. Its not the laws fault people sometimes murder or commit suicide with a gun.

What is acceptable is nothing that blows up on impact, nothing that is fully automatic.
cutthemdown is offline   Reply With Quote