for the record (re: guns thread)

Well, you have wander far afield from the subject, and I allowed some latitude, but now you are in the realm of the absurd.Explosives can have many uses, and most do not involve killing people. Also, C-4 is already controlled as is Sarin gas. So far I do not think I have advocated ready access to either C-4 or Sarin gas.The title of the thread is "for the record (re: guns thread)" which seems to imply that we are talking about, guess what? Guns.Do I have a problem with people having high explosives? No, not really. And C-4 is actually one of the safer explosives, like dynamite, and I would certainly prefer that someone have either of them over less stable explosives such as nitroglycerin.Do I have a problem with folk having Sarin? That is a little tougher. I can think of no legitimate reason right off hand for having Sarin gas, so I would have to say that until such valid reason is presented, I would say no.As to a nuke in every home, again, unless some valid argument is presented, I would likely say no.You need to also remember that in the US, things like explosives, surface to air missiles, nuclear weapons are already proscribed under separate laws than are involved in gun control. They are simply separate issues.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

While there is some validity to the idea of a people rising up to overthrow the government if necessary, the need for nuclear weapons is not that critical. One of the things about nukes is that they really and truly are things that most likely would not be used in such an attempt. The reason is that their use would destroy what was sought.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

I am not Jon.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

You're welcome.The facts though are that owning and bearing arms is a Constitutionally protected Right in the US.That is a very important point. It is a Right, not a privilege.What constitutes "arms" is a matter of law though and it has been debated and right now the laws as they stand are illogical and confusing but tend to place all handguns and all rifles in the category of arms.Fully automatic weapons, while legal to own, require a separate license than semi-automatic ones. Laws on how and where guns can be carried vary from State to State and even City to City and place to place.Eventually this will be settled as a matter of law. I personally hope that the current restrictions on carrying guns is relaxed and that carry is permitted almost everywhere.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

I simply wish to express my position on the gun issue and will continue to do so.Where possible I will continue to point out, to the best of my ability, what I consider to be the significant things to be considered.If you will read what I have posted in this thread I believe you will also find out that I tried to also correct what I considered to be misstatements by Jon. One such example is Message 28.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

No, I don't think I have agreed that things like sarin should be restricted, but it does seem I have not made myself clear so I will try yet again. I do not see where you have supported that, but it is irrelevant anyway.Currently in the US the Supreme Court has not decided or defined the specific limits of what constitutes arms. It has made it clear though that guns are arms.Sarin seems under current law, to be considered NOT arms. Whether that is a reasonable reinterpretation or not, it appears to be the current law.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Fully automatic weapons are already restricted in the US and have been for many, many decades.What is a stockpile of weapons?What is armor piercing rounds?

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Sure. It is neither easy or inexpensive to get a fully automatic rifle. The thread is mostly an emotional opportunity for folk to vent their personal misconceptions. Fully automatic rifles are simply not much of an issue. Again, while protection might be one reason to carry a firearm, there are also many other reasons. I personally know collectors that have hundreds of guns. Again, that is mostly media hype. There is such a thing as "Armor piercing ammo", but it is only seen in things like tanks and anti-tank weapons. What I think you are talking about is ammo that would pierce some body armor. That includes almost all rifle ammo.Body armor comes in many levels of protection. The lowest level is intended to stop most handgun rounds. As you add weight and exotic materials like ceramics you can step the level up to where it will stop most military rifle rounds such as from an AK-47 and M-16. But even that level of armor will not stand up to the average hunting round.Also, the report on the LA Bank robbery is, as is so often the case, simply wrong. They did not have armor piercing rounds. And yes, they kinda had the police out gunned from a technological perspective, but that was mostly because there had been a political decision to limit the arms available to the police. Had the police had a 100 year old deer rifle, the stand off would have been short lived.The problem was that the police were several decades behind in technology. It is still an issue in that most police get way too little firearms training. It's not the police' fault, but rather the fault of society and politics.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Not really.SWAT teams can be of use in some limited situations, but they too are mostly "the low cost politically correct" substitute for actually addressing the problems.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Yes, Bernie Goetz is a vegetarian. And, what pray tell does that have to do with the message you are responding to?

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Sorry but as usual your messages are totally without content or relevance.

A vegetarian? Unlikely. I do enjoy a nice steak or BBQ.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion