Originally Posted by Pocket-full-of-gold
Absouletly you should. Then your deranged son or daughter can gain access to it and take out school children.
That's only fair, right? I mean, that particular owner had "rights" to defend her home with military style weapons.....and was "responsible" in exercising those rights......stored her military style 30 round clip asault weapon responsibly, so that she was never gonna endanger her neighbour. The fact that no-one stopped to consider the proximity of the weapon to an idiot son, is rather an annoying oversight though.
Still, as long as someone's legal right to live doesn't infringe on your legal right to wave assault weapons around, I think it's alright too.
*For the record, I am not "anti gun". I am just pro common sense and as such would like to throw a different persepective on your argument. I know it's impossible to account for all the "what if's".......but nonetheless, they've gotta be worth at least some consideration and discussion, no?*
Deranged son or daughter - yeah, it's possible. I'd like to think that if I did my job well, my posterity wouldn't be a problem for their peers/neighbors. But, my 46 year-old little brother offed himself with a handgun, so tell that to my Dad. Yeah, ya got me there - there's no explaining insanity - but sadly, there's no legislation that can fix it either. I can only rely on me to provide for my future (certainly not the government) and I can only rely on me to protect my home and household.
The Sandy Hook killer's mom apparently didn't control her firearm or her insane son. I wish it were different. If a firearm wasn't available, would he have used a car? A bomb? In the USA, the largest loss of life from terrorist action is the New York Twin Tower/airplane incident. Next worse loss of life prior to that, was the bombing of the Murrah Building in Oklahoma by Timothy McVeigh in 1995. Prior to that was the bombing of a school in Bath, Michigan in 1927. RESPONSIBLE
firearm owners aren't the problem.
Rights to defend my home? If I was your neighbor, and you could trust me with a knife, would you not trust me with a pistol? If you could trust me with a pistol, would you not trust me with an assault rifle? If you would trust me with an assault rifle, would you not trust me with a machine gun? If you'd trust me with a machine gun, would you not trust me with a fougasse? What about a nuke? Honestly, there has to be limit. I'd like to think that if my choice of personal protection didn't encroach on your safety (or maybe enhanced it!) you'd not quibble.
I'm sure most folks, like you, aren't "anti-gun" and I appreciate that - that's why intelligent dialog can only make things better for all of us. If you were my neighbor, would it be OK if I had a dog? How about a dog that barks a lot? Or a pit bull terrier? Maybe we should meet at the fence and talk about it!
Off to bed for now, John