Gun obsession

[Saz]

I support it's removal regardless. The right to a tool is no right at all, it's fundamentally at odds with everything concerning fundamental rights or liberties. Saying you have a right to a gun is like saying you have a right to a hammer. Even if it wasn't harmful or intrusive, and even if i don't care if you have a hammer or not, a right to a hammer is fundamentally stupid and not a god given right like the other amendments in the bill of rights. There is not "right here". A gun is a tool and should be licensed for a privileged and responsible few just like every other deadly tool.

I'm fine with guns being legally owned at 1 dead a year or 1 million dead a year. I'm not fine with the right to own a gun, weather thats 1 dead a year or 1 million. It's not a fundamental right, period, which is exactly why the founding fathers never once mention the world "gun" in the second amendment, but they do mention a "well REGULATED militia".

[John Galt]

the word "arms" was used which are defined in the dictionary as "weapons and ammunition". you don't want to use a word like "musket" because the weapons change with time, but the founders wanted the people's right to self defense (importantly, against the government) to be able to be realized, so the only way to do that is to enshrine a right to bear arms. guns are some of these armaments.

[Saz]

[Medius]

[Tejada]

[John Galt]

[Tejada]

[John Galt]

[Tejada]

[eynon81]

the death tolls go down a bit without guns, but mass murders still occur:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/School_at ... 80%9312%29


also had mass murders back in the day:
http://hiddeninplainsightblog.com/2012/ ... davenport/


also still had bandits and pirates.