Originally posted by kevinunknown
reply to post by pplrnuts
Don’t bother trying because my mind is made up, citizens don’t need guns.
This is definitely a polarizing topic and some would argue that because of this, it is pointless to have these discussions. However, I find value in
being able to have civil discourse with differing opinions. It is this that helps us understand, if not agree with, one another. I believe that we can
agree that we are unlikely to sway the other to change our beliefs, but that does not mean there is nothing to be gained from open discourse. In this
vein, I would like to ask you a couple questions. Not out of derision, but because I am honestly curious.
1) How would gun control, in a realistic and practical way, take guns out of the hands of criminals who already subvert the current laws and rarely
obtain said guns via the legal channels which have been established.
2) You say that citizens do not need guns. Do you believe that there is never a situation in which the citizens would or should find it necessary to
defend themselves against their government or to rise up against tyranny? I must admit that the sentiment behind your statement is foreign to me. It
seems to indicate a trust and belief that the government is going to be altruistic. Historically, however, this has definitely not been the case.
3) Why do guns illicit such ire when they are just the latest extension of the inherent violence that has been a part out our history as long as we
have had a history? Do you feel that gun control laws will truly lower violent crime rates, or do you think that it will just change the type of