Posted: 1/13/2013 11:14:50 AM EDT
|
Why do you need an AR15 or AK47 with a 30 round magazine?
hmmm... Because there should not be a monopoly on who has all the guns. The balance of power through an armed populace checks the central govt. Because it's what the other guy has. It is my god given right that if someone wishes warm to me or my family that I have a right to defend myself. I was born with these rights and not given them by the govt or a document therefor can't be taken away. You cannot legislate crazy or evil. When the crazy and evil people do snap, I want the best tools to handle the threat. Because the Constitution of the United States says that I can, and that I must in case of emergency or a need arises to defend myself against any hostile force, foreign or domestic. If they are good enough for Mexican drug cartels then are good enough for the people of this country to defend themselves. Because the USSC has made it clear that it is an individual right to bear arms of the type that is commonly in use. The AR15 pattern rifle is one of the best selling rifles in the US and is definitely in common use, therefore protected under the Constitution. Because I am a good person and I know there are bad people out there. If you take away all the good people's guns, then the bad people will have an advantage. Because these weapons have proven to be reliable and effective when deployed properly to defend oneself. There was a repeating rifle available around the time of the framing of the Constitution that held 20 rounds in a tubular magazine and was effective to about 150 yards destroying the argument about single shot muskets. Because I couldn't find the words 'hunting' or 'sporting' anywhere in the constitution. Would you trust the govt not to be tyrannical if the populace was disarmed ? If you really feel strongly about disarming the general population, make an effort to repeal the 2nd amendment by 1st having 2/3 of the states to bring it into being, and then having 3/4 of the states ratify it. We are either by rule of law or we are lawless. What part of "shall not be infringed" do you not understand? |
|
Yep, just having a discussion about that in another thread. The thread where a news anchor gets his ass handed to him. Watch this video if you haven't, it's awesome. We all need to read article 46 of the federalist papers. This is where it is covered. I have the book, but if you don't just google it, but be sure to read it.
|
|
If the Second Amendment is truly for giving citizens the ability to protect themselves, including from their own government, then logically (ok here's the hard part for the Libs) LOGICALLY, the citizens must be able to keep and bear arms that would allow them to "compete" with those that would oppress them. It seems to me that the so-called "assualt weapons" are not only included by the amendment, but made necessary by it as well.
But that's just me... |