Posted by laramiebob on 2/15/2018 11:56:00 AM (view original):
It has nothing to do with color Tangy. It's a problem with the current definition of the 2nd Amendment that is the problem.
We GOODSTANDING citizens ALL have the right to possess firearms. Guaranteed.
But does every citizen have a constitutional right to carry military assault type weaponry??
NO ONE needs or uses an AR-15 type gun for hunting animals.
It's an assault weapon!
Defining the 2nd amendment to allow that type of weapon (as we now do and as the NRA and almost all of the "right" want to protect!) IS the problem.
If we allow AR-15 type weaponry then why not Bazookas!?? That's a military assault type weapon. Has essentially the same problem as a hunting tool as an assault rifle. Reckon you'd have to use the Bazooka to fall a big tree on your game animal hahahaha
Anyway. The Gov't will NOT get my rifles, shotguns, pistols, etc and MOST folks feel the same. BUT I don't have or need assault type weaponry and don't feel any NORMAL citizen under normal situations needs one or SHOULD be allowed to possess one!
An AR - 15 type gun ain't gonna do you much good anyways IF the Feds come calling on you with the intent of doing serious battle!
I agree with everyrhing you said except for the second amendment part, because I interpret it a different way. I think it guarantees the right to a well-regulated militia. It does not guarantee the right to just carry around any gun you want. Now, just to be clear, I am against complete gun control. I do think it should be heavily restricted. One must get a liscense, backround check, know how to safely use a firearm, get regular checkups, etc. Additionally, if you have a criminal record or mental heath issues, no gun for you. It just seems like common sense.