Choosing a Gun

[IQS.RLOW]

No it wasn't, the whole point of the lefts 'gun strategy' is to ban a particular type of gun- it is the only thing they want because it erodes the second amendment which is their whole game.

Hand guns have been the primary weapon of nearly every homicide in the US yet the debate from the left is centered around banning 'assault weapons'...the NRA will piss all over you leftard fascists.

Even Bill Clinton thinks uppity latte city snarks are getting too big for their boots

http://www.politico.com/story/2013/01/b ... ml?hp=t1_3" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Former President Bill Clinton warned a group of top Democratic donors at a private Saturday meeting not to underestimate the passions that gun control stirs among many Americans.
“Do not patronize the passionate supporters of your opponents by looking down your nose at them,” Clinton said.

[Rorschach]

Why shouldn't ordinary citizens be restricted in the type of guns they can have?

Why should they?

Disappointing but expected response...

[IQS.RLOW]

And unanswered by yours...

[Rorschach]

Since when is answering a question with a question a proper answer?
Why should I answer yours when you fail to answer mine?
I'm still waiting for you to have the decency and courtesy to answer my question.
I'm not holding my breath though.

Here's another one you will no doubt avoid as well.
Since you spout the 2nd amendment as some sort of defence, isn't it outdated and outmoded in today's America?

[IQS.RLOW]

You are arguing the restriction. It's up to you to put forward your case

Since you spout the 2nd amendment as some sort of defence, isn't it outdated and outmoded in today's America?

No, it isn't.

[Rorschach]

You are arguing the restriction. I don't believe that's true. It's up to you to put forward your case Rubbish

Since you spout the 2nd amendment as some sort of defence, isn't it outdated and outmoded in today's America?

No, it isn't. care to explain why?

Oh goody... more avoidance.

I simply asked you a question. You keep not answering it.
I've now asked another and your answer is hardly enlightening.

[IQS.RLOW]

Why shouldn't ordinary citizens be restricted in the type of guns they can have?

You are arguing the restriction.

I don't believe that's true.

Ok...I'll play. They shouldn't be restricted because they haven't been so far.

Your turn...

[Rorschach]

Why shouldn't ordinary citizens be restricted in the type of guns they can have?

You are arguing the restriction.

I don't believe that's true.

Ok...I'll play. They shouldn't be restricted because they haven't been so far.

Your turn...

Ok my question states no position. It merely asks the question. So no, I never did argue restriction.
Obviously there are restrictions in the US. There are in Australia and in other countries. I'd have thought any restriction is in breach of part of the 2nd amendment.

Your turn yet again.

[IQS.RLOW]

You need to answerthe question first...

I'd have thought any restriction is in breach of part of the 2nd amendment.

You have thought wrong

[Rorschach]

What question?
And yes it is a breach because the 2nd amendment states... "...the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." I submit that a restriction is in fact an infringement.