 | | Re: Gun Control, Unnessesary Evil —Scott Arthur
|
| | | (...) If you are correct, why not just make it costitutional? Scott A (...) (23 years ago, 24-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: Gun Control, Unnessesary Evil —Mike Petrucelli
|
| | | | (...) Because Gun Control is wrong. Did you read the rest of the post. (...) would (...) identical (...) owners (...) (traffic (...) contradict (...) at (...) (23 years ago, 25-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Gun Control, Unnessesary Evil —Scott Arthur
|
| | | | (...) What do you mean it is "wrong"? Is everynation which has gun control (I expect most do) wrong then? Scott A (...) (23 years ago, 25-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Gun Control, Unnessesary Evil —Mike Petrucelli
|
| | | | (...) By Wrong I mean it is unconstitutional in the USA. I explained why it is wrong beyond that in my original post. -Mike Petrucelli (23 years ago, 25-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Gun Control, Unnessesary Evil —Lindsay Frederick Braun
|
| | | | | (...) It's wrong for the context of the United States. Small-arms control may be just dandy for other countries, but the US isn't another country. The Constitution is part of the reason, but it is in itself not enough justification--the Constitution (...) (23 years ago, 26-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Gun Control, Unnessesary Evil —Scott Arthur
|
| | | | (...) So it is not "wrong" then? Scott A (...) (23 years ago, 26-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Gun Control, Unnessesary Evil —Mike Petrucelli
|
| | | | (...) wrong (...) Well if by "wrong" one means, morally, then no. If by "wrong" one means, not a good idea, then yes. (After reading Lindsay's post I relized I needed to clarify my statement) I realize that my position is a minority one in this (...) (23 years ago, 27-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Gun Control, Unnessesary Evil —Scott Arthur
|
| | | | (...) It is evident that the levels of gun use you enjoy in the USA is not stopping criminals either. Do you not think for one second that gun control may have the ability to reduce the numbers of guns which reach the hands of criminals? Do you not (...) (23 years ago, 27-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Gun Control, Unnessesary Evil —Mike Petrucelli
|
| | | | (...) One can obtain a gun illegally more easily than one can legally. If the legal means were eliminated logically only criminals would have guns then. (...) It probably would reduce accidental shootings by persons that own a firearm but do not (...) (23 years ago, 27-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Gun Control, Unnessesary Evil —Dave Schuler
|
| | | | (...) You recognize that this ridiculously popular mantra is a tautology, of course? One might as well say that Internet access requires a computer, so only people who have computers will access the Internet. (...) It is a falacy that people choose (...) (23 years ago, 27-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Gun Control, Unnessesary Evil —Mike Petrucelli
|
| | | | (...) then. (...) It is oversimplifing the situation, I'll grant you that, but is essentially true. If it is illegal to purchase a firearm the only way to obtain one is to become a criminal and break the law. Of course as I stated, at present time (...) (23 years ago, 28-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
