Quote:
Originally Posted by Army5339
Eh, how a politician views the population in regards to firearm ownership speaks volumes about them and the rest of their views. Either as citizens to be trusted or subjects to be lorded over. Anybody who would remove the citizen's ability to deter tyranny isn't to be trusted.
|
I think the keyword is "control", rather than prohibition. Any good gun control law would deter guns appearing in the hands of irresponsible members of societies, such as felons, addicts, alcoholics and the like while not deterrng gun ownership by law abiding resposible citizens.
Furthermore, I believe that in this day and age, there are enough
legal means to counter state actions without resorting to the Anti-Federalist view of using popular militia to counter state tyranny.
Also, what about those citizens who are not interested in bearing arms? Would the arms-bearing population then not be in a poistion to lord over these unarmed citizens, especially if no check is done to ensure that irresponsible members of the society do not get arms in any way?
I am sure there would be countless threads in WAB on this. I would be hapy to thrash this out in those threads, without further hijacking this one.