CGSteve8718
New member
TN Gent,
I'm sure someone has already brought this up before, but how can you seriously not subscribe to the "give an inch, they'll take a mile" view? There are localities, and states that do just that right now.
I have had some military experience as well, and I can see how select fire weapons would not be "practical" for self defense, but DonR and others have already addressed how I feel about that issue, I agree with them.
However, since you don't seem to support them being protected under the 2A for public safety concerns is where it becomes dangerous. Nearly all gun control laws are born out of ignorance from the media, the anti gun crowd, and our elected officials. If you take your stance just one inch further, it would then be good enough to ban and prohibit semi auto firearms that merely have the appearance of their select fire military counterparts. CA is one such place that already does this (among others).
So at first glance, it would also seem that you do not support or would be OK with not supporting the ownership of firearms such as the AR 15's, the entire semi auto AK/AKM platform, semi auto Uzis, etc. either? These semi auto cousins of their military counterparts are no less dangerous because they are semi auto, and if they are barred from ownership from your vaunted public safety concerns, well then, that is taking a mile. And believe me, if that is a "reasonable restriction", then they will eventually be able to "reasonably restrict" any firearms they so choose.
I'm sure someone has already brought this up before, but how can you seriously not subscribe to the "give an inch, they'll take a mile" view? There are localities, and states that do just that right now.
I have had some military experience as well, and I can see how select fire weapons would not be "practical" for self defense, but DonR and others have already addressed how I feel about that issue, I agree with them.
However, since you don't seem to support them being protected under the 2A for public safety concerns is where it becomes dangerous. Nearly all gun control laws are born out of ignorance from the media, the anti gun crowd, and our elected officials. If you take your stance just one inch further, it would then be good enough to ban and prohibit semi auto firearms that merely have the appearance of their select fire military counterparts. CA is one such place that already does this (among others).
So at first glance, it would also seem that you do not support or would be OK with not supporting the ownership of firearms such as the AR 15's, the entire semi auto AK/AKM platform, semi auto Uzis, etc. either? These semi auto cousins of their military counterparts are no less dangerous because they are semi auto, and if they are barred from ownership from your vaunted public safety concerns, well then, that is taking a mile. And believe me, if that is a "reasonable restriction", then they will eventually be able to "reasonably restrict" any firearms they so choose.