Quote:
|
Originally Posted by juttin
I'm saying weak pistols.
|
I now that. Its just not realistic.
Quote:
|
And you're also more likely to not kill someone by shooting them in the arm, maybe shoulder
|
Ever fire a gun? I don't think you have. Again, talk to people that know this sort of stuff and listen to what they tell you about aiming at shoulders.
Quote:
|
A 50 Cal. pistol is one of those guns that can severely injure someone when you shoot them in a trivial place.
|
Any gun will do that.
Quote:
|
A pistol, maybe around .30 cal., wouldn't be too much on a limb (no pun intended)
|
What do you think has to happen for major damage to occur?
Quote:
|
I'm not saying " I think we should use guns to kill people"
|
Well, we certainly can't use them for bottle openers.
Quote:
|
Also, when the amendment was made, we were in a war-bound time
|
Doesn't matter. The Constitution was meant to define the relationship between the government and the people.
Quote:
They actually meant for the guns to be used against British soldiers.
And they were generalizing in muskets, and rifles.
|
Then it would have been written that way. The implication is that it was meant to protect the people from any tyrranical government. Foreign or domestic. The words "British" "musket" and "rifle" are nowhere in the Constitution.