Quote:
Prax said:
then where do you get the argument of having the right to own a firearm for your defense?
|
That is what the 2nd amendment in the Constitution is all about, firearms, and the context is quite clear in the debate that facillitated its entry into the bill of rights.
Quote:
Prax said:
Is this just personal choice of weapon?
|
No, and yes. No, its not just BECAUSE its my personal choice, even though it is my personal choice of preferred weapons. (firearms)
Quote:
Prax said:
why a firearm and not a tank?
|
We are talking about individual rights, and tanks are "crew served" weapons, not individual weapons.
Quote:
Prax said:
Why not biological weapons?
|
No practical use as a defensive weapon on an individual scale, and it is also WMD.
Quote:
Prax said:
what seperates firearms from the other categories of things that can produce injury and/or death?
|
Precision ability, overall application variety and versatility, use as both defensive weapon and survival weapon for hunting, concealability, weight, cost, longevity, investement potential, etc.
Quote:
Prax said:
A taser in which I spoke of could meet all those requirements, except a lesser chance of your target being killed..... which could be developed and distributed easily if there was a demand.
|
Statements like that require proof, and lots of field testing. As I said, I put faith in proven performance, not new trends or high-tech gadgetry.(for defense of my life) I take my time in ammunition selection, based on real world studies, and significant field time testing. I have been following the development of tasers and other new supposedly "non-lethal" forms of defense, but I am nowhere near putting faith in that technology to defend my life, or the lives of my loved ones.
Quote:
Prax said:
You're already gambling with your life with the firearm to begin with...
|
You're not taking into account the facts of training, practice and knowledge of practical application and proper use playing the larger role than simply having a firearm.