A message to our Leadership in America

[DuncanONeil]

"the basis or necessity of the right to bare arms has changed again and it needs to be argued in light of that change- but there also has to be a recognition that possessing the means to turn your fellow citizen into gruel because their dog shits on your lawn is not conducive to a peaceful society. i am not arguing against A right to bare arms; just that some arms are not conducive to the proper functioning of a society. trying to defend them puts that right in peril, especially if it does not make a lot of sense."

Then how do you reconcile the fact that states that have authorized an ability for its citizens to carry concealed handguns experience a significant downturn in violent crime?

[Bren122]

"the basis or necessity of the right to bare arms has changed again and it needs to be argued in light of that change- but there also has to be a recognition that possessing the means to turn your fellow citizen into gruel because their dog shits on your lawn is not conducive to a peaceful society. i am not arguing against A right to bare arms; just that some arms are not conducive to the proper functioning of a society. trying to defend them puts that right in peril, especially if it does not make a lot of sense."

Then how do you reconcile the fact that states that have authorized an ability for its citizens to carry concealed handguns experience a significant downturn in violent crime?

your post does not make sense in light of the quote; i don't mention conceal and carry laws.

it is this simple- liberals say that all guns are dangerous and they should all be banned.
i am saying that going to the public and saying that no gun should be banned because back in 1870 it was useful on the prairies is to ignore that very few people live on the prairies anymore. what possible reason could there be in an urban or rural environment for a gun with a 30-50 round magazine with a rate of fire in excess of 650 rounds per minute?
the vast majority of the public are all for handguns for self defence and hunting rifles, etc. where you lose them, and worry them, is when you mount a defence for these automatic and semi-automatic military rifles, machine guns and sniper rifles.

[DuncanONeil]

No you did not I did. However, the focus and tenor of your recent messages has been that having weapons available and ready was the major contributing factor in wide spread violence. My making the jump to CCW, with its concomitant reduction in violent crime is more appropriate than your jumping back to either the founding or the expansion and attesting that those conditions do not exist and therefore the need for firearms does not exist.
Why is there a need in a modern city for firearms, some cities (some portions of others) have the same reputation as Dodge city did before the arrival of Wyatt and his brothers. I do not know how big that town was but it is not unreasonable to understand that you could get from one side to the other in a short period of time. I live in a place with some 600,000 people, 97 square miles of ground, and only a bit over 600 cops on duty at a given time, with less on the street. In certain parts of town you could be beaten to death before the cops get there. Yet you seem to wish to insist that that is my best option.
You also try to base a complete ban on firearms on a single category. The is a word for that tactic. To use such to get someone to agree and then postulate that into a general dismissal of all firearms is not a valid argument.

your post does not make sense in light of the quote; i don't mention conceal and carry laws.

it is this simple- liberals say that all guns are dangerous and they should all be banned.
i am saying that going to the public and saying that no gun should be banned because back in 1870 it was useful on the prairies is to ignore that very few people live on the prairies anymore. what possible reason could there be in an urban or rural environment for a gun with a 30-50 round magazine with a rate of fire in excess of 650 rounds per minute?
the vast majority of the public are all for handguns for self defence and hunting rifles, etc. where you lose them, and worry them, is when you mount a defence for these automatic and semi-automatic military rifles, machine guns and sniper rifles.