A bunch of Iraqis are pretty much doing that now. How long has the US military been over there, and they are still meeting armed resistance? Add to that the reluctance of some of our military to fire upon their own people and you might find that even a semi-well regulated militia could “take on” a seal team. If this were not the case, there would be peace in the Middle East. There is a difference between conquering a people and destroying them entirely. The US government would not issue orders to destroy the country, therefore, the entire might of the US Armed Forces would not be utilized. There… done with rant.
Yes indeed. Guns are just like rattlesnakes! They are capable of independent operation and are also capable of killing people even if they are just sitting there with no one to handle them!
Stats are good, too. Firearm murder rates will be higher in countries with firearms. Yes. I understand that. How about murder rates overall? Let’s include all weapons.
Gun ownership does not mean rocket-propelled grenades and Predator vehicles.
Alright, let’s get rid of all guns. All of them, the police won’t even have them, or the military, or anyone at all. Let’s all go back to the days when might make right and the biggest, strongest people ruled the weak.
If I remember my history correctly, peoples’ rights and property were all highly respected in the middle ages when people were unable to stand up for themselves.
Peasants and nobility - a perfect way of life.
Read your history folks. Read about the steps the dictators and genocidal murderers took before their rampages. Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot, etc.
More people are killed by automobiles than by guns: outlaw them.
More people are killed by physicians than by guns: outlaw them.
Baseball bats and golf clubs are much more popular weapons in crimes of passion than guns: outlaw them, too.
Knife crime runs rampant in countries where private ownership of firearms is not allowed. People in Britain are sending their children to school in stab-proof vests now.
Here’s an idea; instead of trying to pass laws which restrict law-abiding citizens of their right to bear arms, why not enforce the laws we already have on the books? The plan should be to punish the bad guys, not strip the good guys of their means of protection.
Wow, the fear mongering runs rampant! The taxpayers would never end up paying for a public option. You bet it will work on its own. Just look at how well the banking and mortgage industries are doing!
A bunch of Iraqis are pretty much doing that now. How long has the US military been over there, and they are still meeting armed resistance? Add to that the reluctance of some of our military to fire upon their own people and you might find that even a semi-well regulated militia could “take on” a seal team. If this were not the case, there would be peace in the Middle East. There is a difference between conquering a people and destroying them entirely. The US government would not issue orders to destroy the country, therefore, the entire might of the US Armed Forces would not be utilized. There… done with rant.