“On what grounds can the country justify giving citizens the ability to fire off 30 or more rounds in a near burst?”
The grounds of a constitutionally guaranteed right to defend oneself. Remember, by definition, criminals don’t obey laws
>The grounds of a constitutionally guaranteed right to defend oneself. Remember, by definition, criminals don’t obey laws
>
IMO, you lost the debate right there. If you’re going to go by ‘definition’, define correctly:
1) The Constitution guarantees nothing
2) Our Rights, as much as the 2nd, are inalienable
3) Defense is but ONE facet of the Right to keep/bear arms; it is not the end-all.