originally posted by: ScepticScot
a reply to: NavyDoc
Not necessarily insane, untrustworthy or paranoid. However all gun owners are dangerous as having a gun is an inherently dangerous thing. Gun
ownership shouldn't just began individual decision as it has implications for others.
The problem is that you're applying a general principle to a specific thing, while ignoring exactly how wide and general the principle is.
More people will be killed drunk drivers in the UK this decade (if not year) alone, than have been killed by guns in the last 100 years (not counting
in wartime, as we're talking about civilians rather than soldiers).
Why should drinking be an individual choice, as it has implications for others? People have destroyed the lives of others while under the influence of
drink, whether through driving or fighting or domestic violence or just acting the fool and going too far, both deliberately and without intention.
Why should driving be an individual choice, as it has implications for others? People have destroyed the lives of others while behind the wheel of a
car, even when sober. Not just "accidental", but through their own negligence or ego, and sometimes without being at fault themselves - just the wrong
person in the wrong place when a child decides to dash out across the road from between parked cars.
We expect people to reach an age of maturity before they can drink on their own. Once they reach it, they are free to drink as they please. Who are
you to say what they can and cannot do if they are doing it without impacting on anyone else?
We expect people to demonstrate that they have the skills to safely drive a car before we issue them with a driving licence. Once they have it, they
are free to drive whatever car they please, to whatever destination they please, whenever they please. As long as they are conforming to the same
rules of the road as everyone else, who are you to say where and when they can drive, as long as they are doing it without impacting on anyone
We expect people who own firearms to pass a background test and demonstrate the ability to keep the firearms stored safely. Once they have their
certificate, they should be free to purchase and use whatever firearm they want, as long as they do so without affecting anyone else.
If the potential for causing death and destruction is enough to warrant interfering (a madman with a gun can kill so many more people!) then why isn't
drinking illegal? Why isn't driving illegal? We know for a fact
that these are all responsible for many more deaths, because it happens every
single day, all across the country. Not once a decade, but every single day.
Ah, but people can drink responsibly and drive responsibly. Because "the only reason for firearms is to shoot someone, they have no other purpose"?
You'll need to explain that to the healthy competitive and recreational target shooting community in the UK, because they seem to have come up with
plenty of other ways to use firearms that don't involve placing anyone else in danger. Hunters, gamekeepers, and farmers all have plenty of good
reasons as well.
In case it's not clear, I disagree rather strongly with you
edit on 9-8-2014 by EvillerBob because: (no reason given)