Reply #31: No Thanks On Your Idea [View All]

[Deadric Damodred]

No thanks on that. Heller has ruled that you can’t interpret the 2nd Amendment like that anymore than you can the other ones. So I don’t even have to debate with you on this issue, because the courts overrule your opinion.

And for your being pompous about it, like saying “gun owners fear the boogieman” let me be pompous right back. Lots and lots and lots of people are buying guns, mainly the semi-automatic military look-a-likes that you call “assault weapons”. That’s just to damned bad for you, because even if you could ban them, which you can’t because you don’t have the votes, we already own them……..too late.

Of course then you are going to say “why do we need them”, again, too late, we already own them so there is no need to justify them. But let me give you a really really pompous answer. You want a justification for owing “assault weapons”? Here’s a perfectly legal reason that will piss you off: Because they are cool-looking. There is nothing more fun than taking a semi-automatic rifle that looks badass because it looks military, going to the gun range, setting up bowling pins, and “playing Rambo”. How’s that for pompous for ya?

But I guess the main point is, it doesn’t matter what you think. The courts think differently than you, and there are enough Blue-Dogs in Congress to side with the GOP to pass pro-gun legislation and screw anti-gun legislation. We win. You lose.