Tuesday, August 18, 2009
The Limits of Personal Rights
"A 14 year old should be able to get a belt fed, full auto machine gun from a local hardware store and not fill out a single form."
Okay, in nearly all non farm states, a 14 year cannot even get a learners permit to drive. Physiologically, teenagers brains are not fully mature which in part accounts why teens get into more auto accidents than older drivers.
I do not think we need to discuss that most teens, particularly younger ones, are not emotionally mature.
So why should a 14 year old be able to buy a fully automatic belt fed machine gun?
In addition, precisely what social good is accomplished by allowing any private citizen to own a fully automatic belt fed machine gun?
Freedom and our God given right to the pursuit of happiness are both social goods in my book. What about your?
I'm all for following one's bliss.
But allowing private citizens to own machine guns is an invitation to mayhem.
Of the 70,000, how many are collectors' items. For what can you use a fully automatic weapon, except shooting at the range?
Meanwhile, Columbine, Jonesboro, Red Lake, VA Tech, Zest for Life Spa. How much worse could these have been if the whack jobs who perpetrated them had access to fully automatic weapons?
Shooting targets on the range is all I do with all my pistols and with some of the long rifles. Your point?
Yes, troubling to think that full autos could have made things worse in the mass murders you name. I think that Va Tech could not have been much worse even with full autos. Like the NRA I don't think violent criminals or crazy people should own any guns but in reality I am for giving the 2nd amendment the same treatment we've given speech in the 1st, that is, punishment for crimes only, no prior restraint.
Rifles and shot guns can be used for hunting. Handguns can be used for self defense. All may be used on a range.
What is the utility of a fully automatic weapon?