Off-Topic: Dr. John Lott's research

Lake Martin Topics

(Lake Martin Specific)

111,143 messages

Updated 4/25/2024 7:30:23 PM

Off-Topic

Lakes Online Forum

83,605 messages

Updated 4/25/2024 9:33:24 PM

Boat Maintenance

Lakes Online Forum

5,193 messages

Updated 4/3/2024 3:47:36 AM

Lake Martin Fishing

(Lake Martin Specific)

4,169 messages

Updated 4/16/2024 3:16:57 AM

Jokes

Lakes Online Forum

4,169 messages

Updated 4/15/2024 11:05:05 PM

Sports

Lakes Online Forum

4,260 messages

Updated 3/24/2024 9:24:45 AM

Grilling & Recipes

Lakes Online Forum

2,976 messages

Updated 3/20/2024 11:53:43 PM

Lake Martin SCUBA

(Lake Martin Specific)

169 messages

Updated 5/31/2023 1:39:35 PM

Tallapoosa River Topics

Lakes Online Forum

98 messages

Updated 4/15/2024 1:00:58 AM

Forum Usage Rules

Welcome, Guest

Select View Mode: [ classic | beta | recent ]

	Name:	Scottie -
	Subject:	Dr. John Lott's research
	Date:	1/15/2013 5:10:16 PM

A very important point has been missed or ignored.
Dr. Lott's question about the need for certain weapons is either deliberate misdirection of
an argument or an absolute misunderstanding of the purpose of the 2nd Amendment.

Please allow me to state in general terms that the 2nd Amendment is NOT about hunting,
shooting sports or the size and type of weapons we can own. This point in itself is often
overlooked or ignored by the gun control group.
The 2nd Amendment is about the citizens of these United States being able to defend themselves
against the government should the government become tyranical or over burdensome. The
2nd Amendment also did not limit the size, types, styles, etc. of the weapons the citizens can own.
While I do not believe that the government as become tyranical, I do feel that by allowing the government
to restrict the number of bullets a gun may hold I am giving a potential enemy a decided advantage over
my ability to suppress tyranical behavior.

Just one final question to all of you. Some here seem to feel that it is ok for NY, Chicago, etc. to put limits on
gun ownership which is contrary to the constitution. So my question is this:
If a state passed a law to reinstate slavery would you feel ok with that?

Of course it's a stupid question and gun ownership has nothing to do with slavery, but the logic still applies!