The Cellar - View Single Post

richlevy · 12-15-2007, 11:34 AM

Whether discussing abortion or the second amendment, I am not fond of 'slippery slope' arguments. While everyone can point to something like Nazi Germany as an example of progressively restrictive laws reaching a terrible conclusion, the idea that any restriction can be rejected because it might lead to more and more restrictions is simply an excuse for no restrictions.

One argument holds that individuals need significant firepower to keep a possible rogue US government in check. If I remember correctly, aren't National Guard units under the authority of state governors? As for civilian ownership, if you look at Iraq, you will notice that every time the insurgency is limited to guns they lose. The only significant US losses are from IEDs VBIEDs. So using the 'government in check' theory would assume that the second amendment extends to rocket launchers, or at least a few hundred pounds of explosives.

The reality is that existing US law already denies citizens the right to sufficiently arm themselves for a revolution (or counter-revolution) against the US military. Get over it. If you want to prevent a rogue US government, then fucking vote.

The second argument is sports. Noone uses handguns to hunt deer (except for a funny scene in Hoffa), so the handgun argument is for target shooting. If 1 gun a month is insufficient for a target shooter, they should apply for an exemption.

The last argument is for personal defense. This is already in practice. In many cities, individuals selling drugs frequently end up shooting at each other. The second person to fire is practicing self defense. This usually reaches the headlines when a bullet ends up killing a 9-year-old girl (it appears that adult victims don't rate headlines) because she was outdoors or the bullet passed through the walls of a house. The argument becomes does the individual right to be safe from stray bullets outweigh the right of every citizen to be armed. Guns are not swords or knives, they are capable of killing indiscriminately.

12-15-2007, 11:34 AM	#262
richlevy King Of Wishful Thinking Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: Philadelphia Suburbs Posts: 6,669	Whether discussing abortion or the second amendment, I am not fond of 'slippery slope' arguments. While everyone can point to something like Nazi Germany as an example of progressively restrictive laws reaching a terrible conclusion, the idea that any restriction can be rejected because it might lead to more and more restrictions is simply an excuse for no restrictions. One argument holds that individuals need significant firepower to keep a possible rogue US government in check. If I remember correctly, aren't National Guard units under the authority of state governors? As for civilian ownership, if you look at Iraq, you will notice that every time the insurgency is limited to guns they lose. The only significant US losses are from IEDs VBIEDs. So using the 'government in check' theory would assume that the second amendment extends to rocket launchers, or at least a few hundred pounds of explosives. The reality is that existing US law already denies citizens the right to sufficiently arm themselves for a revolution (or counter-revolution) against the US military. Get over it. If you want to prevent a rogue US government, then fucking vote. The second argument is sports. Noone uses handguns to hunt deer (except for a funny scene in Hoffa), so the handgun argument is for target shooting. If 1 gun a month is insufficient for a target shooter, they should apply for an exemption. The last argument is for personal defense. This is already in practice. In many cities, individuals selling drugs frequently end up shooting at each other. The second person to fire is practicing self defense. This usually reaches the headlines when a bullet ends up killing a 9-year-old girl (it appears that adult victims don't rate headlines) because she was outdoors or the bullet passed through the walls of a house. The argument becomes does the individual right to be safe from stray bullets outweigh the right of every citizen to be armed. Guns are not swords or knives, they are capable of killing indiscriminately. __________________ Exercise your rights and remember your obligations - VOTE! I have always believed that hope is that stubborn thing inside us that insists, despite all the evidence to the contrary, that something better awaits us so long as we have the courage to keep reaching, to keep working, to keep fighting. -- Barack Hussein Obama Last edited by richlevy; 12-15-2007 at 11:39 AM.