Guns Everywhere
Discussion
http://news.sky.com/story/1248330/guns-can-be-carr...
What a bunch...
Churches can allow worshipers to bring guns to services under the law, but are not required to do so.
What a bunch...
Churches can allow worshipers to bring guns to services under the law, but are not required to do so.
I was working at one of our offices in North Carolina and was somewhat bemused to see a sign stating that the management would appreciate it if all guns were worn visibly when in the office, giving the distinct impression that being armed to go to work was a pretty run of the mill thing, but that having it tucked in your pocket rather than worn on your hip was pushing it a bit.
Sure enough, there were several guns to be seen in the office, unsurprisingly worn by white men in their 50s who looked to be about as much fun as having a tooth extracted without anaesthetic.
Sure enough, there were several guns to be seen in the office, unsurprisingly worn by white men in their 50s who looked to be about as much fun as having a tooth extracted without anaesthetic.
The right to bare arms doesn't specify what kind of "arms". They've drawn the line at fully automatic guns, mortars and field-artillery. So why not just limit the arms to something that stays in the constitution but makes it considerably harder to commit mass murder. Such as, everyone is allowed to bring a pike to Church? Or broad-swords are acceptable to carry on public transport. Trebuchets must be visible at all time?
TEKNOPUG said:
The right to bare arms doesn't specify what kind of "arms". They've drawn the line at fully automatic guns, mortars and field-artillery. So why not just limit the arms to something that stays in the constitution but makes it considerably harder to commit mass murder. Such as, everyone is allowed to bring a pike to Church? Or broad-swords are acceptable to carry on public transport. Trebuchets must be visible at all time?
TEKNOPUG said:
The right to bare arms doesn't specify what kind of "arms". They've drawn the line at fully automatic guns, mortars and field-artillery. So why not just limit the arms to something that stays in the constitution but makes it considerably harder to commit mass murder. Such as, everyone is allowed to bring a pike to Church? Or broad-swords are acceptable to carry on public transport. Trebuchets must be visible at all time?
I wouldn't attend any church that refused me entry just because I had my anti aircraft flak cannon with me!FourWheelDrift said:
TEKNOPUG said:
The right to bare arms doesn't specify what kind of "arms". They've drawn the line at fully automatic guns, mortars and field-artillery. So why not just limit the arms to something that stays in the constitution but makes it considerably harder to commit mass murder. Such as, everyone is allowed to bring a pike to Church? Or broad-swords are acceptable to carry on public transport. Trebuchets must be visible at all time?
rohrl said:
It that causation or correlation though? One year isn't a very long time to measure crime stats.
Absolutely just something I read the other day I'll try and find the article. No need for the I'm a potato picture Think this is a different one but says similar thing. Note lots of maybes etc etc.
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/04/04/gun-con...
Edited by Pesty on Thursday 24th April 14:44
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff