Skip to main content

View Diary: A Question For Gun Owners (77 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Here's my problem with this (8+ / 0-)

    "I see a good number of people stating that they own one or more guns and taking the position that any laws that would end their legal right to posses a firearm would be unreasonable and deprive them of something that they feel is necessary."

    NOBODY in the public sphere is talking about ending people's legal right to possess a firearm.  NOBODY.  People ARE talking about common sense regulations regarding what types of weapons the public should be allowed to own, and how ownership is handled.  The whole "they're going to take away my guns" argument is a complete straw man, and it's infuriating.  Nobody is going prevent you from owning a gun.  It will not happen (nor should it, imho).

    I don't own a gun, and have no reason to own a gun, but I live in suburban Orlando and I don't have any interest in hunting.  If I lived in the middle of nowhere I might consider it.

    •  I certainly agree that there will (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Smoh

      be no general prohibition on gun ownership. However, I want to know why people think that any move along that path poses such a threat to them.

    •  Part of the problem here is that the Second Amend (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Richard Lyon

      ment is generally treated as one which cannot be interpreted, limited or in any way qualified, whose freedom is the only absolute one in effect in this time, despite the terms about well regualted militia. No other amendment is supposedly so free of limiiters and qualifiers. If the second amendment was generally treated the same way as the other amendments, we would not have this issue.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site