"I think it would be better if arguments about such things should focus on what is right, rather than what is consistent with a manmade document cobbled together by disputatious upoliticians a couple of centuries ago, and which can in principle always be altered if necessary, though that may be difficult in practice."

As I have attempted to do. I have brought up the points that , to me, indicate the present laws being proposed will NOT have the desired effect, and will in fact increase the number of illegal killings. Those who disagree with me have not yet argued that I have errors in my statements.


Mrrzy,

"n answer to question 1) So you would convict all police of murder? Um, no, since almost no cops fire their guns or kill people, plus cops are not civilians, so why would you even imagine that the same rules apply."

If the ONLY purpose is to kill, then police who have guns are just waiting to kill people.



"In answer to point A that you can't shoot feathers, well duh. That's why I picked that example."

You don't make sense- if TARGET SHOOTING is a valid sport ( see Olympics et al) and feathers cannot be shot out of guns, then YOU premise is stupid.

YOUR POST:
-------------------------------------------------------
Subject: RE: BS: Guns in America
From: Mrrzy - PM
Date: 20 Apr 18 - 10:12 AM

The purpose of a gun is not to prevent others from using one, it is to propel bullets into targets, but not the paper ones. There is no need for bullets to be propelled unless it is to penetrate flesh. That is, to kill or maim or mangle or hurt or damage or yes kill. You could shoot feathers if the point was to hit paper targets, so nonsense.
--------------------------------------------------------------




"In answer to question 2) Is the goal to reduce deaths, or limit the ownership of firearms? I do NOT consider that these are the same point. Who asked this question? I didn't."

I asked that question, and ONLY Sean Fear has had the honesty to give me an answer. The claim is that the proposed laws will reduce illegal killings: I have presented reasons and factual support that they will not, that they will increase illegal killings, and that there are far more deadly things that COULD effectively be reduced if LIVES were of any concern.



"And what that I said was opinion? "
-----------------------------
The purpose of a gun is not to prevent others from using one, it is to propel bullets into targets, but not the paper ones. There is no need for bullets to be propelled unless it is to penetrate flesh.
-----------------------------
Nobody, but nobody, is trying to take away people's right to bear arms. That is gun-totin' propaganda.
-----------------------------

The above statements, made by you, are not factually supported- therefore they are either deliberate lies or opinion. I give you the benefit of the doubt.