Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Today's Daily News cover for 3rd anniversary of Newtown CT shooting [View all]Straw Man
(6,943 posts)122. You're easily amused.
Last edited Tue Dec 15, 2015, 04:29 PM - Edit history (1)
Guns are not meant for that: they are meant for killing.
None of my guns are meant for that. You may have trouble understanding it, but it's true.
My husband was an occasional duck hunter for many years. He still has a shotgun. And yes, he's an older
white male.
white male.
So by your prior logic, his opinions too should be discredited because he's soon to be in the minority? Right?
But he would also tell you he has no need for a pistol or an assault rifle.
He's perfectly free not to own one, then -- but not to make that determination for someone else. In any case, "need" is irrelevant in a discussion of rights. After all, no one "needs" to vote, right? Many people live happily their entire lives without ever doing it.
He's also a psychiatrist/psychoanalyst and can tell you that there are a LOT of people in this country who should not have access to firearms.
If you mean people who have been adjudicated to be a danger to themselves or others, then I wholeheartedly agree. That's what you meant, right? Otherwise you're suggesting that your husband's profession qualifies him to deny rights to those he disagrees with politically, and that's some pretty dangerous ground.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
125 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
I can't even imagine...prayers to him. I think for me to survive something like that
adigal
Dec 2015
#86
But it doesn't apply equally to the rest of it, because the whole thing isn't about guns.
kcr
Dec 2015
#42
So, because I think their slaveholder status was relevant to guns, that means I think it's good?
kcr
Dec 2015
#54
Oh, so the 13th isn't Constitutional enough. Disregard the amendment that corrected THAT mistake.
kcr
Dec 2015
#60
This is the point where I click the "Back" button and go look for something else to read.
NBachers
Dec 2015
#105
Waters = muddied. Good job with your pointless nitpicking. Yay for you. n/t
leeroysphitz
Dec 2015
#97
Ah, yes, but the point is The Constitution has been amended to give full rights
mnhtnbb
Dec 2015
#87
No. Any person wanting to serve with a State Militia (National Guard these days)
mnhtnbb
Dec 2015
#98
The Constitution can be amended. I'll stand my ground on that one. It only takes
mnhtnbb
Dec 2015
#101
Indeed. We have no need for more guns than people in this country. It's definitely a health hazard.
mnhtnbb
Dec 2015
#113
Common mistake. Estimates of the number of people who own guns is quite different...
mnhtnbb
Dec 2015
#118
People tend to only follow laws they agree with and make sense to them.
virginia mountainman
Dec 2015
#33