Quote:
|
Originally Posted by MaggieL
And a person can defend themselves more effectively with a gun.
|
MaggieL again ignores facts. Those who carry guns for defense more often have that gun used against them. Cops carry a gun as an offensive weapon. When called to defend another, the cop goes offensive. Guns for defense is reasoning based only upon emotion, speculation, and in direct contradiction to statistical reality.
Second fact from history. As number of guns increase, then number of violent murders increase accordingly. This was documented many years previous in the Cellar.
We license drivers and cars. Dangerous items require the user and machine to be carefully trained and maintained. That is the purpose of licensing – responsibility. MaggieL does not demand requirements for responsibility. She advocates rights. But responsibility is secondary and sometimes ignored. No wonder she also advocates extraordinary rendition, torture, violations of the Geneva Convention, violations of the Universal Declaration for Human Rights, nonsense called 'unlawful enemy combatant', and eliminating the writ of Habeas Corpus. A complete denial of responsible attitude – what some call American morality.
Responsibility is secondary to rights? Who often suffers when carrying the gun? MaggieL forgot that fact.
No one is talking about banning guns. But then need for responsible gun owners is somehow spun into myths about eliminating all guns. Included is a myth that more guns means safer streets - a complete lie.
Everyone working in a Post Office should carry a gun? Good. Then the wacko need not go home - realize his mistake - before shooting his manager. A perfect solution to underfunded pension funds and social security.