Gun Control & RKBA
In reply to the discussion: I think this paragraph from The New Yorker really sums up the gun control debate here on DU [View all]krispos42
(49,445 posts)I trust you'll have an entertaining time here in the Gungeon, as it is nicknamed with varying amounts of glee. I can virtually guarantee you that you will NOT have an entertaining time in Gun Control Reform Activism, nicknamed "Castle Bans-a-lot".
Anyway, I'm pleased to inform you that I am pro-gun and against useless, pandering laws like assault-weapon bans and magazine limits. A quick check of my posts here, including the one pinned to the top of this Group analyzing the 25 worst mass shootings, should quickly validate my positions to you.
My point in the post you're replying to is that, because we have a RIGHT to own guns, and not a privilege extended arbitrarily by the government, then we also have the right to own guns without having to justify either the purchase or the reason to the government, and that we can have the guns configured as we feel fit (within the broad framework of the 1934 National Firearms Act).
Nations like Australia extend the right to own guns to its citizens only for valid reasons, and only guns that can be used for those valid reasons. These reasons do not include self-defense and thus they can ban a wide swath of guns as having "no valid reason" to be legal.
I've noticed that gun-control states that have strict limits on firearms also have strict limits on non-lethal and muscle-driven self-defense weapons as well. In some of those states, getting a Taser or pepper spray is very difficult, knives are limited in size, and other self-defense weapons such as brass knuckles are outlawed.