NJ passes Bill that limits Purchase of Handguns to One per Month
#11
Why is that "common sense"?
Why should you be able to go out and buy a high performance car? Surely the availability should be restricted to save lives, besides you don't need it anyways.
So many people have an irrational fear of firearms, and this is an example.
The bigger point is that we are supposed to be a free society, made up of laws. A free, law abiding man should be able to buy as many firearms in a month as he wants. These are laws that are set up to criminalize law abiding people in an attempt to limit freedom and provide more control to the government. Meaning, this is nothing more than an attempt to limit freedom.
Why should you be able to go out and buy a high performance car? Surely the availability should be restricted to save lives, besides you don't need it anyways.
So many people have an irrational fear of firearms, and this is an example.
The bigger point is that we are supposed to be a free society, made up of laws. A free, law abiding man should be able to buy as many firearms in a month as he wants. These are laws that are set up to criminalize law abiding people in an attempt to limit freedom and provide more control to the government. Meaning, this is nothing more than an attempt to limit freedom.
Sure you are limiting freedom, but will it in reality affect people's life?
And if it does, is it really a deep impact? Will Gary suffer from not getting two Sig Sauers in January?
I'd say that the possible benefits surpasses the drawbacks.
#12
If its not affecting anyone then it's just an extra layer of government that costs money to maintain and frustrates otherwise law-abiding citizens. There is absolutely zero point in that.
There are already 300 million guns in the US, this restriction is not going to limit the number on the streets by any noticeable percentage.
There are already 300 million guns in the US, this restriction is not going to limit the number on the streets by any noticeable percentage.
#13
Dave's thoughts in this thread are a fine example of just how clueless most of the world is in regard to freedom and liberty. The USA is the last frontier and we are losing more of it, every single day, to this mentality.
#14
You know you guys have waaay harder traffic laws and enforce them way harder than the European ones right?
Sure you are limiting freedom, but will it in reality affect people's life?
And if it does, is it really a deep impact? Will Gary suffer from not getting two Sig Sauers in January?
I'd say that the possible benefits surpasses the drawbacks.
Sure you are limiting freedom, but will it in reality affect people's life?
And if it does, is it really a deep impact? Will Gary suffer from not getting two Sig Sauers in January?
I'd say that the possible benefits surpasses the drawbacks.
And bro, we have more than enough laws on the books already!!! The bigger point is that it is a straight up move to limit freedom. I "get it" that such a principle isn't a "thing" in Europe so much, but to some of us over here; it is a HUGE issue.
"Limiting freedom" DOES "in reality affect people's life" my friend! Especially when you have the cowardly politicians who are trying to limit our freedoms via incrementalism. So yes, it does have a "deep" impact.
Thing is, you should have absolutely no ability to have an effect on how many firearms I can purchase at any time, period. I am a well trained, law abiding citizen who is also a veteran. If I have the means, it is my purview to purchase a firearm. The only reason you should concern yourself with the issue is if you would have any ill intent towards me. If you don't, then you'll never have any need to be concerned about my firearms. Firearms do not kill people or commit crimes. The person who picks it up, loads it, aims it and puts it to use is the problem; not the firearm.
#15
The Second Amendment IS my concealed weapons permit - PERIOD!
YouTube - Texas Monthly Talks TED NUGENT
YouTube - Texas Monthly Talks TED NUGENT
#16
Thing is, you should have absolutely no ability to have an effect on how many firearms I can purchase at any time, period. I am a well trained, law abiding citizen who is also a veteran. If I have the means, it is my purview to purchase a firearm. The only reason you should concern yourself with the issue is if you would have any ill intent towards me. If you don't, then you'll never have any need to be concerned about my firearms. Firearms do not kill people or commit crimes. The person who picks it up, loads it, aims it and puts it to use is the problem; not the firearm.
But think about it, how clever is the Average Joe...then remember that half the population is dumber than that
The guns don't kill people is true, but the facts are that whether it's the availability of guns or whatnot, there are a lot of gun related deaths.
If there's 300 million guns, would it hurt to reduce that number by a bit? It's sacrifice you have to do, to benefit the general population.
Off course, this argument only holds for true if you believe that the number of guns available in the society is somehow related to gun related deaths. I kind of have a hard time ignoring the causality.
Guns do not breed crime. Often, poverty, the sense of injustice and segregation and off course the good old fashioned greed causes crime. But the availability of guns will surely help when committing crimes.
So if there aren't any guns to steal from private homes, the illegal import of guns are absent, the number of guns available to criminals would be low, right? Then you wouldn't need a gun to defend yourself etc.
I'm not saying that you should ban guns, but I do believe that without any guns, there would be kind of hard to shoot anyone (try to argue that!)
I guess it all comes down to how sensitive you are to reductions of your freedom vs. a potential general gain.
#17
NJ, another fine state ruined by Democrats.
CA and NJ, two sates with the most criminal friendly gun laws.
That sure makes a lot of sense, restrict law abiding people's rights to buy guns, because the crinimals will also obey the gun purchase limit too, right?
CA and NJ, two sates with the most criminal friendly gun laws.
That sure makes a lot of sense, restrict law abiding people's rights to buy guns, because the crinimals will also obey the gun purchase limit too, right?
#19
Doing this will INCREASE crime. We saw that in the UK after they banned guns. Property crime rates went from around the same as the US to far above it. I've never had a car stolen or had my home broken into and I like it that way.
#20
I know you guys need a permit for a squirt gun in the people's republic of Sweden.
Your country is not built on giving people the ability to defend themselves as well as keeping the govt in check with a well armed population.
The point is not about what is enough, but the fact that the govt is telling you what IS enough.
Here's one of my recent post election purchase that many American TS'ers here also got.
Your country is not built on giving people the ability to defend themselves as well as keeping the govt in check with a well armed population.
The point is not about what is enough, but the fact that the govt is telling you what IS enough.
Here's one of my recent post election purchase that many American TS'ers here also got.