LogFAQs > #887736747

This was put into the Constitution so that we could violently overthrow our government. But by that rule, we should be allowed tanks, armed drones, armed fighter jets, bombs, missile launchers, etc. Clearly we cannot as citizens overthrow the government by force using what is legal still, so that argument has no merit. You're either for the original intent (and thus I am allowed to own nukes), or you understand that technology has changed too much for that to be valid still.

Zeus posted...

Oh? So arguing that one thing is ineffective because you only need it when shit happens isn't like another thing you only need when shit happens? Is that really the defense you're going to try to use today?

A gun is effectively an insurance policy. It's there to protect you IF or WHEN you need it.

No it is not. The rate at which good guys with guns make the situation better is almost nothing. Law enforcement and first responders have a harder job because of the idiot thinking he's a hero. You're also far more likely to hurt an innocent than to actually do any real good. It's not insurance, it's gambling.

Zeus posted...

Plus, as riots in the past few decades have shown us, you DO need that shit.

I actually do accept this argument. Very rarely, you might have a valid defensive purpose for a firearm. But the vast numbers of people killed each year far outweighs this rare occurrence.