Here are two aspects of the gun issue that make no sense to me:
1. The need to have a safe gun locker. Sure, everyone can agree it's best to keep firearms away from children, but if some bad guys break into your bedroom, are you going to have time to unlock the locker, get ahold of your gun & then confront them? From an expeditious personal security standpoint, gun lockers defeat the purpose of having guns.
2. The whole notion that current legal firearms will enable modern day patriots to take down a tyrannical US government. Please. Either the whole idea of taking down the government was specific to the early period of our nation and the sophistication of weaponry at that time, or today's 2nd Amendment advocates are selling out - in a very big way - by not insisting on the right of any citizen(s) to have serious military weaponry.
From a "purist" standpoint, why couldn't somebody like Bill Gates or Larry Ellison have the right to own their own aircraft carrier + all the weaponry that comes with it? (Come on, how about a little intellectual honesty here?)
I found a pro 2nd amendment argument on the web asserting that guns rights folks - if pressed on the matter - should firmly advocate the rights of the homeless to own nuclear weapons... not because any homeless person would have the means to have nukes, but because making any compromise from that position erodes freedom.
Silliness, pure & simple.
|