Nightline's Daily Line

ok heres the argument... guns are too dangerous for the average person to have so lets outlaw them.

i have been saying the same thing about cars and airplanes and boats for years...
the average person isnt smart or responsible enough to operate these kinds of vehicles, (which btw have alot more potential to do mass injury and mayhem than ANY gun or guns or most any other weapon that can be legally obtained ) without lots of mishaps and "accidents" ,which is why liability insurance is REQUIRED to operate any of the above items...its my opinion that licenses for all those kinds of vehicles should be much harder to obtain ,but every retard of a tom ,dick or harry can get a license to drive a 4000 lb potential molotov cocktail....

see how silly the argument sounds when you transpose it to other very dangerous but more accepted/ubiquitous items that are used every day by most every american ?? start down the slippery slope of banning things "unacceptably dangerous" and you ll have to ban EVERYTHING that could POSSIBLY be dangerous... hey lets ban fertilizer and kerosene too ,and dont forget those deadly peanuts too!!!

ok heres the argument... guns are too dangerous for the average person to have so lets outlaw them.

i have been saying the same thing about cars and airplanes and boats for years...
the average person isnt smart or responsible enough to operate these kinds of vehicles, (which btw have alot more potential to do mass injury and mayhem than ANY gun or guns or most any other weapon that can be legally obtained ) without lots of mishaps and "accidents" ,which is why liability insurance is REQUIRED to operate any of the above items...its my opinion that licenses for all those kinds of vehicles should be much harder to obtain ,but every retard of a tom ,dick or harry can get a license to drive a 4000 lb potential molotov cocktail....

see how silly the argument sounds when you transpose it to other very dangerous but more accepted/ubiquitous items that are used every day by most every american ?? start down the slippery slope of banning things "unacceptably dangerous" and you ll have to ban EVERYTHING that could POSSIBLY be dangerous... hey lets ban fertilizer and kerosene too ,and dont forget those deadly peanuts too!!!

ok heres the argument... guns are too dangerous for the average person to have so lets outlaw them.

i have been saying the same thing about cars and airplanes and boats for years...
the average person isnt smart or responsible enough to operate these kinds of vehicles, (which btw have alot more potential to do mass injury and mayhem than ANY gun or guns or most any other weapon that can be legally obtained ) without lots of mishaps and "accidents" ,which is why liability insurance is REQUIRED to operate any of the above items...its my opinion that licenses for all those kinds of vehicles should be much harder to obtain ,but every retard of a tom ,dick or harry can get a license to drive a 4000 lb potential molotov cocktail....

see how silly the argument sounds when you transpose it to other very dangerous but more accepted/ubiquitous items that are used every day by most every american ?? start down the slippery slope of banning things "unacceptably dangerous" and you ll have to ban EVERYTHING that could POSSIBLY be dangerous... hey lets ban fertilizer and kerosene too ,and dont forget those deadly peanuts too!!!

ok heres the argument... guns are too dangerous for the average person to have so lets outlaw them.

i have been saying the same thing about cars and airplanes and boats for years...
the average person isnt smart or responsible enough to operate these kinds of vehicles, (which btw have alot more potential to do mass injury and mayhem than ANY gun or guns or most any other weapon that can be legally obtained ) without lots of mishaps and "accidents" ,which is why liability insurance is REQUIRED to operate any of the above items...its my opinion that licenses for all those kinds of vehicles should be much harder to obtain ,but every retard of a tom ,dick or harry can get a license to drive a 4000 lb potential molotov cocktail....

see how silly the argument sounds when you transpose it to other very dangerous but more accepted/ubiquitous items that are used every day by most every american ?? start down the slippery slope of banning things "unacceptably dangerous" and you ll have to ban EVERYTHING that could POSSIBLY be dangerous... hey lets ban fertilizer and kerosene too ,and dont forget those deadly peanuts too!!!

cars, airplanes, and boats have other uses besides killing people. Pistols, machine guns, .50 caliber weapons don't. Let's take the argument the other way - why does the NRA stop at the little stuff (although I hesitate to call a .50 caliber little)? If a pistol is good, a bazooka should be much better. I rather point a bazooka at a robber any day.

Please consider some of the countries in which just about everyone owns a gun:

Afghanistan
Pakistan
Iraq
Tombstone, Arizona

etc.

How's that working out?

It's absurd and possibly moronic to insinuate that the answer to this is for everyone to carry a gun.

As for the 'any retard can get a license to drive a car' remark, if the NRA were in charge of the DMV, they would also be able to get a license to drive a tank.

Consider the countries that do not allow guns to circulate freely.
Imagine yourself as a Virginia State Trooper showing up on the campus of Virginia Tech having to decide which student with what gun you should shoot.

Grow up little boys and give up your lethal toys.

nice try steve but not quite cogent.

when is the last time you heard about anyone getting killed with a .50 cal. ,in the usa that is? truth is , most people are shot with cheap guns ( this latest guy used a shotgun ,THAT YOU CAN HUNT FOOD TO EAT WITH ,so they are useful items steve,at least to some people ) that use cheap ammo, .50 cal and most big caliber ammo is too expensive for thugs,so they dont use it much really. and as for someone with money ,well they will get what they want/need regardless of any laws saying they cant ,because they have the WAYS AND MEANS to do so. kind of like dog fighting laws and some rich ahole like michael vick no dogfighting law was going to stop them from doing that,just like no law will EVER stop a person with some $$ and the will to do so from getting all the guns/weapons they ,and their friends want/need.

see steve, making laws to keep guns out of law abiding citizens hands WONT keep them out of lawbreakers hands ,simply because of 101 level economics , ie; where there is a demand for something ,legal or illegal(ESPECIALLY IN THIS MONEY GRUBBING LAND OF CAVEAT EMPTOR) some "enterprising" individual will find a way to supply for that demand ,especially when its more profitable than something else.

making guns illegal will only make a black market gun/$$$$ bonanza for illicit sellers...duh!!!actually ,pistols ,especially cheap ones are pretty easy to manufacture and just about any capitalistic minded ,unethical money grubber with a few $$ can easily set a clandestine machine shop and make very cheap illegal weapons ,resulting in HUGE profits...but thats a pretty far fetched scenario i know,some rich fatcat in the usa breaking laws to maximize profits to get rich while not giving a crap about anyone else...right?

and steve, you CAN get a license for just about any vehicle (tanks included) (in most states) that passes emissions and inspections ,dmv requirements . have you never seen a tank in a non military parade on a state highway , because i know i have .

and anyway , i doubt that a legally licensed tank of any kind would have even 1/100 the damage capability of a freight tanker loaded with deadly chemicals or even just gasoline...

and steve, please dont use 3rd and 4th world nations that are barely out of the stone age ethically and morally but have lots of money to buy weapons (among other things) as examples of nations with ethical and moral gun owners and realistic and enforced gun ownership laws ,im sure if you do some objective research youll see there are plenty of nations that allow RESTRICTED firearms ownership by the general populace that have a low incidence of firearm attacks/ mortality....um as i remember sweden is one of them...checked the crime rate in sweden lately? the yearly rate of homicides via gunshot? steve ,steve,steve....go read up dude!

(one last point,one of the main reasons the nazis never invaded sweden is because every male there had a gov. issued rifle and knew 110% how to use it! and they still do!)

Switzerland - Low gun crime, every able bodied citizen is required to own and know how to operate a gun.

Most countries that outlaw guns have higher incidents of crime overall (that is, if the government lets you know about it).

We need a real deterrent. Commit a gun crime, then be removed from society for good. End of story. No, ten different trials and retrials. No, sitting on the row for years with appeals. Make it cheap and easy for the good citizens to get rid of the repeat criminals.

patrick thats exactly the point....if the students wouldve had their own guns that guy wouldve never shown up toting a gun himself, he knew he was among un armed sheep so he was a fearless killer.

secondarily ,if he DID show up with gun in hand ,and the other student WERE armed themselves...by the time the va state trooper DID (finally) show up ,the shooter wouldve been long dead and less innocent people would be dead overall...its called "FIRST RESPONSE" and if the authorities arent going to put armed police/guards in every classroom then i think these student have a right to either arm themselves or the schools should be REQUIRED to lock down these buildings during class hours and do whatever is needed to make these places secure...one thing is certain, i know if I was a terrorist/psycho and was looking for a super soft target with virtually NO security ...schools ,churches and other places where lots of unprotected/unarmed sheeple congregate would be on the TOP of my list!!

and cops are going to have to start asking questions first and shooting second as well...no one is safe when they are taught to protect themselves at all costs...yearly in the usa police routinely shoot more innocent people than all these mall/school killings combined...so maybe we should get rid of the police force ?

nijcstv yqlkrvuag pujhid petm qnml pzej osrf

Folks, I'm going to get the ffl licence to start selling guns on the internet. Government at all levels is no longer constrained by the constitution, lets save what freedom we can while we can.