03-19-2018, 05:14 PM
(03-19-2018, 05:03 PM)fredtoast Wrote: No one disagrees with you. That is what the entire balancing argument is about.
Odd, it would seem many disagree with me.
Quote:We let some criminals escape prosecution to protect us from the power of an unlimited police force.
We "let" some criminals own guns to protect us from having the guns of law abiding citizens taken from them.
Quote:Right now we let criminal own guns but there is no potential damage from the other side to balance. What do innocent people gain from letting criminals have unlimited access to buy guns?
Criminals aren't allowed unlimited access to buy guns. A convicted criminal can't legally buy any guns, much less have unlimited access to buying them.
Quote:There is no counter-balance. Citizens could still own guns with licensing and registration laws, but it would make it much more difficult for criminals to buy and posses them.
Sure there's a counter balance as I've explained in other threads. Also, make your argument to a resident of California, because it falls flat here.
