Posted: 10/25/2006 2:11:52 PM EDT
|
I don't know if this has ever been asked before, but it's something I've been wondering lately. To start off, I must say I'm strongly AGAINST gun control (duh!). I moved out of California a while ago, so I've seen the worst form of gun control, legislation, and registration. It's awful there. So here's my question, how much, if any, gun/arms control should we have. Say we repeal the MG and import ban (which I'm definitely for). What's next? Will they repeal whatever laws saying we can't have RPGs, live grenade rounds, etc. Then take it a step farther; who's to say we can't have tanks or fighter jets. Yes, that may sound ridiculous, but where does it stop? Where do you draw the line? I agree with having to undergo a thorough background check for NFA items, as there are scumbags out there that have awful intentions. So, what do YOU think? |
|
I think guns are a RIGHT, not a privelage, and should not be regulated in any way, shape, form, or fashion. If a bad guy gets a gun, he's getting it legally OR illegally. Weapons of mass destruction, like ordinance for fighter jets, is a different story of course. But the issue of background checks and regulation is a fallacy based on a slippery-slope argument that is used to show a cause for an effect: "Well, we have to keep them away from bad people some how..." Which only leads to more regulation and the reason we have the title transfers we do today. |