 | | Re: Gun debate (was Re: New Web Page
|
|
(...) To the best of my knowledge, my Ruger never has. (...) What possible reason could you have for that? They are quite obviously protected by the second amendment. Every weapon available to the agents of government are protected by the second. (...) (26 years ago, 14-May-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Gun debate (was Re: New Web Page
|
|
(...) Give me one example of a fire arm that was produced, but never intened to discharge a projectile (other than a starting pistol). (...) it. (...) I will concede that they are currently protected under the second amendment, but I _personally_ (...) (26 years ago, 14-May-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Gun debate (was Re: New Web Page
|
|
(...) Are you saying the to discharge a projectile is the same as to kill? My ruger has discharged many projectiles, but probably never killed...I bought it new. But, for the sake of the argument, I believe that there are collectible firearms that (...) (26 years ago, 14-May-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Gun debate (was Re: New Web Page
|
|
(...) Discharging a projectile is not the same as to kill. If that were true, I could be arrested just for vomiting. My point was that guns were designed to kill by shooting at the intended victim (animal, vegitable, or mineral). I asked if you (...) (26 years ago, 14-May-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Gun debate (was Re: New Web Page
|
|
(...) So it is your belief that a revolver is ok while a semi-automatic pistol like my Glock is not. What's the difference, really? I can almost guarantee you that I could kill someone with the revolver more efficiently than the Glock, if for no (...) (26 years ago, 16-May-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Gun debate (was Re: New Web Page
|
|
(...) It also sounds like a stupid question. What do you think, that if enough people admit that guns, in essence, are meant to shot projectiles that will kill another person, they'll just vanish? Or gunowners the world over will just jump up and (...) (26 years ago, 16-May-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Gun debate (was Re: New Web Page
|
|
Mike Stanley wrote in message ... (...) Of course if one got down to it, one could make a constitional issue of it since the Bill of Rights specifically indicates that it is not the sole enumeration of rights. It is an enumeration of the rights (...) (26 years ago, 17-May-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Gun debate (was Re: New Web Page
|
|
(...) Why is this? (...) Paintball leaves a lot to be desired with respect to accuracy. I guess part of my bias here is that I own my own marker and know how it shoots. I understand what its limitations are, and work with them. (...) I don't see the (...) (26 years ago, 17-May-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
