The argument the government uses to justify limiting what arms a person may own is that allowing some arms but not others, within a reasonable limit, is not an infringement of the right to bear arms.
First, do you agree with this assessment, or do you believe that any limitation is an infringement?
For those who are against gun control, is it because you think people should be allowed to own any weapon they please? I could make a crude chlorine bomb, and with a little time and study, I bet my dad and I could make a rocket with a range of about a mile in his garage. Given the materials (which I should be allowed to buy, if it is an infringement of my rights to prohibit arms) I think I could build a crude nuclear device. Will you defend my right to do so?
If not, what's the real argument against gun control? Is your objection with which weapons they allow and which ones they ban? Do you feel you don't have enough say? Should the Constitution be amended to define which arms are in?
2007-02-23
09:48:51
·
10 answers
·
asked by
Aleksandr
4
in
Politics