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
Gun Control & RKBA
In reply to the discussion: M1 Carbine Imports Banned [View all]Straw Man
(6,924 posts)65. I hope I'm misreading you ...
..let's all just become emotion free killing machines.
... because you appear to be saying that unless we base public policy on emotion rather than reason, we will all become murderers. You seem to be laboring under the delusion that rationality precludes ethics, morality, and empathy. I would submit to you that unrestrained, unreflective emotionality is more likely to result in the "killing machines" you fear.
This is the reason we have civilian control of the military - because those who place their vested interest above that of others don't make better decisions by that virtue.
O King of the Non Sequiturs, whence comes this pronouncement? Civilians = emotion? Military = rationality? Military = vested interest? Civilians = no vested interest? Rationalists have a vested interest but emotionalists don't? Vested interest in what? Don't leave me in the wilderness -- enlighten me.
Nowhere in the Constitution is the right to own dozens of guns enshrined.
I thought it was somewhere in among "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed." I know that you think this is restricted to the point of negation by the prefatory clause; I disagree for a number of reasons, not the least of which is the fact that "shall not be infringed" is rather strong language for a right that you're claiming is restricted and contingent. But really, more than anything, I just feel that you're wrong. And that's what's it's really all about, isn't it?
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
103 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
Good news on the M1 Garands, but what a strange rationale for denying the M1 Carbines.
aikoaiko
Jan 2012
#2
Meanwhile, the ad for Big Five Sporting Goods in this morning's fishwrap is hawking...
slackmaster
Jan 2012
#3
Looks like the administration finally figured out that they had stepped in it.
Simo 1939_1940
Jan 2012
#4
You wouldn't understand this, but Simo 1939_1940 is supporting Democratics that way.
aikoaiko
Jan 2012
#6
How about people just leave the dang things at home. You guys could start tomorrow.
Hoyt
Jan 2012
#23
I have never had a gun stolen in 30 years - and the threat has been steadily reduced for 20 years. n
hack89
Jan 2012
#40
Blame the victim for the crime. Where have we seen this vile shit before? n/t
PavePusher
Jan 2012
#41
So that was your single issue back then? -- Voting for candidate committed to bombing Vietnamese.
Hoyt
Jan 2012
#12
I did not vote for the guy who promised to bomb people. Apparently, you liked that promise.
Hoyt
Jan 2012
#18
All those beloved M1's would be a gold mine considering the prices of originals these days.
ileus
Jan 2012
#7
Detachable-magazine-fed rifles are not illegal in the US, nor have they ever been...
krispos42
Jan 2012
#8
I'm guessing he's never heard of the civilian marksmanship program, ever.
AtheistCrusader
Jan 2012
#103
Yes, because thugs are really looking around for 3 foot long 10lb battle rifles.
AtheistCrusader
Jan 2012
#102
And how exactly do you propose that paranoid people be prevented from owning a dozen guns?
Jean V. Dubois
Jan 2012
#70