12-29-2018, 02:42 AM
LR1955 Wrote:Montana:
Talk about emotional arguments that are purely speculative, read your own paragraph. The one about the gun free zone has to top the list. You are assuming falsely that most Americans would carry guns if there were no restrictions placed on them. That wasn't even true in the 'Old West'. You actually think that things would have been different if the Ruby Ridge blaster had a M-60 MG instead of his pistol or shotgun? Maybe so. That would have been resolved with one pass from an Apache.
One other thing. I surely will criticize stuff when I see it. Nothing saying as a mod I can't take part in things.
LR55
Your statement concerning his gun-free zone comment presents an over-assumption/false choice. You do not have to assume that "...most people would carry guns..." You only need to assume, or grant, that more people would be carrying than do now, and that there is more probability that someone or ones would have been present to fire back at those assaults, thus likely deterring or reducing casualties. In fact, you only need to observe that massacres certainly seem to be perpetrated in "gun-free"zones... therefore with fewer of those zones there would likely be less mass-shootings. OTOH, admittedly, if there were indeed still as many GF zones under the "more people carry scenario", then the # of carrying citizens might not help as much. Even Dodge City in the old west was, at times, entirely a GF zone (if some history is to be believed)... which (in fairness) may have helped, or maybe not. Even so, allowing more carry can be a rational attempt to reduce massacres in public.
I don't see how such a comment from Montana is emotional as it can be shown to have a fairly rational basis as I explained.
To be fair, let's not over-assume or offer up over-stated strawmen counters.
The Ruby ridge, M60 or Apache issues, I will leave to y'all to discuss.
"Down the floor, out the door, Go Brandon Go!!!!!"

