posted on Sep, 4 2007 @ 06:43 AM
A man could use any weapon to harm someone if he wants. If a man has one gun and one bullet. Or if guns dont exist, then a knife or rock would
suffice. So why get rid of guns?
Because guns make killing easy.
He doesnt have any guns?
Of course he has guns!
The man had over 18,000 rounds of ammo!
If they didnt find any guns he must have them stashed somewhere else. The man was planning on using the ammo to "defend those he loves" during the
comming economic failure.
Tell me how he would defend those he loves with bullets and no gun?
By throwing the ammo real hard?
Um, he believes in a coming economic crisis. He believes a revolution is coming.
What if he doesnt want to get hurt?
How will he keep his standing and profit from such a time?
By selling Ammunition
i see your logic my friend it would be great if we could gather up the worlds weapons and destroy them
Only guns! Ancient weapons have a soul. Guns do not. They are merely an extension of your own strength and skill, even a crossbow requires winding.
But a gun is purely a weapon of the wallet. More money=bigger gun=faster shots=more deaths.
So all it takes for probable cause is someone filing a restraining order on you?!! What am I missing?
You want to give a person who has a restraining on them a gun?
ill prefer not, thank you.
So all it takes is for someone to be judged mentally ill and we can't have ammo? Aren't we all mentally ill since we're on this forum?
Lets just give all asylum inmates matches and see how that goes
Keeping him under a watchful eye is one thing...
yes, but the thing is that police wont have the time to intervene until after he strikes, if he chooses too.
Also, watching him at all hours would be a break in his right of privacy, would it not?
This way they are keeping an eye on him in a place where he cant do any real damage. If he can give a good justified reason why he has all the
ammunition, and if he passes a psychiactric exam, then im sure they will let him go.
[edit on 4-9-2007 by Octavius Maximus]