montana Wrote:I see we have moved from moderator to critic. OK I will play. If there were no restrictions on firearms, perhaps most of the innocent people that have been slaughtered in gun free zones would still be alive because they would not have been fish in a barrel. If there were no restrictions on firearms, perhaps the thousands of rapes, car jackings, muggings and home evasions would not have resulted as most do in places that restrict guns. Perhaps the hundreds of millions murdered by democide would have never been so pervasive since people in government would not have had the exclusive of the tools of force. If there were no restrictions on firearms, there would have never been any Ruby Ridge, Waco Texas, or Oklahoma city bombing. If there were no restrictions on firearms, perhaps there would have never been any 911, and the longest war the US has ever been in.Good points, all, but somewhat overstated.
If there were no restrictions on the right to keep and bear, many of those events would've undoubtedly had better outcomes.
However, it is a safe bet that no restrictions would almost certainly have undesirable outcomes which are conceivably worse.
As LR55 noted, imagine how much worse the carnage would've been in Las Vegas if the shooter had a belt-fed machine gun.
montana Wrote:Perhaps John Adams was correct when he stated our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.LOL. What moral and religious people?
The religious people of Massachusetts and Connecticut who jailed and executed people for witchcraft?
The religious people like Washington, Jefferson, Madison and others who enslaved generations of black people?
The religious people who killed many of the indigenous people, then confined the survivors on reservations?
Our Constitution was written primarily for the white male population. The Founders may have been religious, but they sure weren't moral.