Replies

first you start with "reasonable" restrictions... then the laws expand and their costs... based on the latest GUN TRAGEDY... and there's always one to whine about... the end result being we always need more restrictive laws.

"but what about the criminals having guns"
You are mistakenly of the opinion that our gun laws have had a proven history of keeping guns out of the hands of criminals... laughable. CRIMINALS don't OBEY GUN LAWS... Hence the laws we deem SENSIBLE they deem as INSANE... and they both procure and use them against the rest of us anyways.

you would be far better off if we were all armed to the teeth INCLUDING the criminals and psychopaths, than you are with most of the sane people who SHOULD be packing... walking around unarmed.

ALL gun laws by those terms, are therefore a waste of taxpayer time, money and an eggregious loss of freedom to defend oneself...

Gun laws, in your premise which is a false one, DO NOT keep guns out of the hands of criminals or crazies...

They cannot... as by definition, criminals do not recognise or obey our laws and KNOW how to flaunt them. and crazies do not rationally comprehend our laws, and often do the same thing...

false premise. but it's too good to see folks show their true colors. SCREW the constitution, if it makes us feel safer!!!

Thank you for proving my point. You'd rather stand on an irrational principle than to make even the slightest nod to common sense. That's why you'll always be the 1% party.

Of course some criminals will still get guns. By your logic, there should be no laws against murder or rape because murderers still murder and rapists still rape even though the laws are on the books so we are only giving BIG EVIL GOVERNMENT the right to interfere more and more with our lives when we, the people, give them right to prosecute people who murder and rape.

And you libertarians still blush when people call you anarchists...