Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

To: bigdaddy45

Of course I see a down side to it (risk), but life is risky and this is a Constitutional right. Where do YOU draw the line? What firearms/weapons are you comfortable with the public owning? If you say anything less than what I’ve offered, then you are one of the “sensible gun control crowd”...And don’t give me the “but what about the jihadi/ISIS/local Mosque” nonsense...the same can be said about a handgun, vehicle, rocks, chlorine/ammonia mixtures, etc....where do you want to start restricting? Anyone who sets their mind to it can inflict all kinds of damage if they really want to and work at it.


59 posted on 02/19/2018 5:22:51 PM PST by ripnbang ("An armed man is a citizen, an unarmed man, a subject.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies ]


To: ripnbang

Sorry, but I oppose private citizens being able to legally own nerve gas, or a nuclear weapon that could kill tens of thousands of people. Call me crazy.

The Second Amendment isn’t a suicide pact.


61 posted on 02/19/2018 5:32:31 PM PST by bigdaddy45
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson