r.a.,

We’ve already been over that.

RickA says:

“If the government can force you to buy health insurance they can force you to buy a gun.”

Was that tongue-in-cheek too? I rest my case.

No, they are not. almost record lows.

“Abortion wasn’t even a consideration. ”

No, abortion has always been available, but historically available only to the well off. Your knowledge of history is abysmally bad (or you simply choose to pick and choose and lie about things, which I judge to be more likely).

“Under the weight of gun control”? We don’t have gun control. That is the point. I’m not sure how you have the audacity to spout crap like that.

Locales in the “old west” had gun restrictions on citizens far more stringent than we have today, with no problems.

State militias were required at a time when there was no standing army — they were explicitly for local and national defense. Travelers required protection for a variety of reasons having to do with wilderness and the times.

Finally, your knowledge of Scripture is as pathetically bad as your general knowledge. The stories have Jesus making the instructions to buy swords at the Last Supper:

He said to them, “But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don’t have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one.”

(from Luke). Nowhere else does he instruct follower to purchase weapons (and he says (essentially) “he who lives by the sword will die by the sword”, from the time of his betrayal). More importantly, the interpretation of the “sword quote” is generally taken to be an advisement to his followers that because they were about to depart on a journey without him and they would need an instrument to prepare food, cut wood, and possibly for protection.

Have you always had these problems with reading comprehension and understanding?

I already did (assuming they read this blog).

What a vile, lying piece of shit you are.

I do not assume that the families of the bereaved read this blog. And I meant face to face. You are a big mouth online, but I very much doubt you’d open it in front of the victims’ families because you know how that would go down.

Why you folks even give this grade A arsehole the time of day is beyond me.

Because he never goes away. Either you punch back, or you get pushed out of the ring. You know how it works.

“no civilian applications whatsoever”, except the most recent one, BBD

Okay, mass murder – there is that.

See this:

https://gregladen.com/blog/2017/11/06/hey-texas-give-guy-guns-wants/#comment-552417

But please feel free to ignore me in the future (if you want).

Roger

Two probs with that:

1) Millions of “assault” rifles are now owned by U.S. citizens. None of them are actual paramilitary assault riles, which are fully automatic weapons.

They are paramilitary. The military kit does 3 shot burst and full auto.

They are murder weapons, plain and simple. They have no civilian application and could reasonably be banned in the interests of public safety as the combination of high rate of fire (~60 rpm unmodified), high magazine capacities (30 – 40 round) and modification potential make the the perfect choice for mass murderers. As we have seen, repeatedly.

1) Millions of “assault” rifles are now owned by U.S. citizens.

Because the US gun industry has bought enough politicians and judges to open up this market. But this class of rifle has been banned before and could – if the corruption of democracy were addressed a teeny bit more robustly – be banned again. But only when the lives of US citizens are set above profits in the weapons industry.

Two probs with that:

1) Millions of “assault” rifles are now owned by U.S. citizens. None of them are actual paramilitary assault riles, which are fully automatic weapons. They are all semi-automatic. Ugly, but popular, and modular for customization. AFAIK tell, their popularity is a direct blowback against efforts to ban guns.

2) The very fact that they are popular increases their Constitutional protection, ironically, as (at least) one of the three recent Supreme Court cases reaffirming individual ownership rights speaks of popular weapons as being more protected than rarely used ones.

If my company asked me to go on a business trip to Texas today, I would flat out refuse. No way am I going to be able to relax for even one second with gun-toting arseholes walking the streets or sitting in the same restaurant I’m in. The US has completely *lost the plot*. The inmates are running the asylum.