need to have a 9mm or any gun that allows you to put magazines in it if you are only trying to defend yourself aren't there any guns that are not as lethal?
2007-04-18 12:25:23 · 11 answers · asked by ziggy 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Law Enforcement & Police
I don't know much about guns ,but there has to be a compromise. so that those who feel that they need a gun can have one for self defense and those who feel that guns kill alot of innocent people
2007-04-18 12:57:33 · update #1
Sure a toy gun.... but the whole point of a gun is to be lethal... Why would you want to defend your self with a non lethal weapon?
2007-04-18 12:44:05 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
What's the problem with magazines of ammo? That's only marginally different from a revolver. Are you saying then that a gun would be OK if it could only shoot one non-lethal round? What the heck good is that? If you're using a gun for self defense, it's already considered a lethal situation - same reason cops don't aim to wound, they shoot to kill. Anything less puts even more people at risk.
2007-04-18 19:45:28 · answer #2 · answered by mattzcoz 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
The non-sporting purpose of the handgun is to kill people. Therefore what is needed are highly-accurate and reliable handguns along with large-capacity magazines. And that's just what we have.
You see (and this is the central point here), this country WORKS. Eventually we arrive at the correct place regarding any particular issue.
And once the 15 states that don't already have shall-issue finally get with the program we'll be just where we need to be. After all, we're never gonna have a policeman on every corner, are we? See www.packing.org for more pertinent info.
2007-04-18 19:38:42 · answer #3 · answered by Fast Eddie B 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Guns that are not as lethal? Yeah, they're called water pistols and cap guns.
A gun is not for giving booboo's and owies, it is for serious self defense. That's why you only use them as a last resort and you don't aim unless you intend to kill.
A gun without a magazine is just an expensive paperweight.
2007-04-18 19:31:08 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
All guns are lethal, no matter what calibur or whether or not they are magazine fed or not! Why not ban cars, they kill more people than guns do!
2007-04-18 19:31:50 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Less lethal guns? That's what handguns are for, to kill people.
2007-04-18 19:30:45 · answer #6 · answered by joeanonymous 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
No they are guns their purpose is to kill or destroy stuff. Smaller calibers are less of a threat but all guns can kill.
2007-04-18 19:36:33 · answer #7 · answered by Clif S 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Why would I compromise with someone who is wrong? Gun control is wrong.
2007-04-18 20:32:30 · answer #8 · answered by gunplumber_462 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
While it is true that my preference would be to ban all guns altogether, I recognize that this stance is rather extreme and not necessary to start reducing casualties every time someone goes bonkers. We could start by banning automatic assault weapons and all handguns except low calibre revolvers. Ban magazines for rifles, make them all single shot.
Come on people, guns exist for one reason and one reason only: to kill people. That's why they were invented. That's why people own them. Hunters can claim that they like killing defenseless animals too, but guns weren't invented to kill animals. It's just a happy coincidence that they bleed to death as efficiently as humans. Look into your souls people and examine the REAL reasons that you want to own a gun. Maybe you can lie to yourselves, but you can't lie to me...
2007-04-18 19:35:37 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 3⤋
Those who assume that are the anti-gun lobby.
2007-04-18 19:32:02 · answer #10 · answered by furrryyy 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋