Quote:
Originally Posted by Taltarzac725
Marlin Model Golden 39A - Wikipedia
I had one of these or something like it when a 13 year old in Reno, Nevada. This was back around 1972. I could hit a soda can at 50 feet with practice but that is about all.
There are many such arms that would be very useful for home defense. But I do not see even someone like Annie Oakley doing much against tanks, helicopters, mines, destroyers off shore, jets, heavy artillery, missiles, etc. which a government would have.
|
With all due respect that is a speeches argument , the ability of the governed to oppose the government is taken away long before the use of heavy weapons in armed military assault on the civilian population would occur as demonstrated in countries listed in other posts. History seems to demonstrate that unarming of the population is the first step down the road to an oppressive government. It's within living history a time when the availability of semi automatic military weapons were easily obtainable and "mass shootings" were just about unheard of. would this not strongly suggest that the problem is more "sociological" than availability of weapons?
Benjamin Franklin once said: "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." I think he was talking about a taxation issue but the logic hold here as well