the supreme court just turned over the DC law outlawing hand guns. this is a sticky issue. im all for freedom, but im also all for not getting shot. however, i lived most of my life in states with pretty liberal gun laws and have not been shot yet. also, i think if i were to be shot, it probably wouldnt be by a legal gun owner. i have to say that most people i know with guns are very responsible with them and i think that people should be allowed to hunt, shoot for fun, and protect their homes even if that does seem a little Mad Max to me.
here i go, siding withi Dick Cheney of all people. but i do share the court's dissenters concerns "that would have us believe that over 200 years ago, the Framers made a choice to limit the tools available to elected officials wishing to regulate civilian uses of weapons." He said such evidence "is nowhere to be found."those regulations that concern me are those that exist to limit the sale of machine guns and background checks to keep guns out of the hands of criminals and mentally unstable people. i honestly would be in favor of very strict restrictions on who could own guns and very thorough checks to keep guns out of the hands of those who might misuse them, but allow those who are responsible to have the privilege, but i dont support an all out ban.
what do you think?
WaPo
No comments:
Post a Comment