General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: By Du definition, I guess I have an assault rifle. [View all]Sophia4
(3,515 posts)Your having a gun in the house would have just made it easier for the intruders to kill you.
What if you had been too weak or too young to shoot it?
Again, the gun would have been more dangerous to you than not having a gun.
What if you were then not permitted to have a gun for some reason such as depression or some nonviolent mental disorder? What if you were mentally challenged?
Guns are for people who are fit.
Guns make survival all the more difficult for the disabled.
Not having guns is much better for those who are not so perfectly able to defend themselves.
On a farm, out in the country, guns are perhaps needed.
But I live in a city, and I don't want any guns at all possessed by people who are not members of the police force in my city. They serve no purpose.
If people want to shoot for sport, let them form gun clubs and leave their guns on the gun club premises-- locked up, please.
We do not need guns in cities. And if someone has one and having it is a felony, then you can easily, and police can easily, identify criminals because they are the people who have guns. Militias can be formed and regulated and their weapons kept in an armory. That satisfies the 2nd Amendment.