Kristy;147183 wroteNormally anarchy and freedom of choice rank pretty highly with me...but in this instance I can't help but think that your qualifying remarks of "(within the law)" and "(again, within legal bounds)" are a little naive sounding. The law is not infalliable, and reasonably often it is not even a great guideline for the general needs OR wants of the people it restrains or enables.
Guns are only used for killing, 'deterrents' are ineffective and I just can't see a reason to allow guns for the general population... I do feel that there are great reasons to disallow them.
Kristy;147193 wroteEasy there snarky-pants ;) I'm not debating prohibition, I'm waxing poetic about my own contradictions between wanting to allow the competent and intelligent persons (like yourself) to decide for themselves, and eliminating (as much as possible) an object that serves no positive or productive function and a better balance between these two.
I am kinda disappointed; I was expecting some venom and vitriol..that is the entirety of my contribution to that thread.
Pretty simple difference between then and now. I grew up in the city, and had never met a hunter. I still champion restricted gun ownership here...you should hear my rants about the conceal and carry permit holders, and handgun enthusiasts.