Although his arguments were all over the map, I gather that his objections to the .50 is that it is a little more powerful than anything his local PD has. Extrapolating, that means I should check with the chief to see what my caliber limitation are. "Dang, nothing above a .223? Shucks! Okay, thanks chief!"
THE INTENT of OUR FOUNDERS is that they wanted the PEOPLE to be ARMED AS THE MILITARY, (Which they perceived as THE BAIN OF LIBERTY). The Anti-Gun crowd are forgetting, (or maybe their not), about TYRANNY! That this guy was in the military and doesn't understand what he was sworn to 'UPHOLD AND DEFEND' is ludicris!
Although his arguments were all over the map, I gather that his objections to the .50 is that it is a little more powerful than anything his local PD has. Extrapolating, that means I should check with the chief to see what my caliber limitation are. "Dang, nothing above a .223? Shucks! Okay, thanks chief!"
ReplyDeleteUniformed fear with a large dose of "see, I'm on your side, Mr. Policeman", is a form of paranoia.
ReplyDeleteParanoia being a mental incapacity under the law, should this man be allowed to own guns? I'm all in favor of his rights,........but....
THE INTENT of OUR FOUNDERS is that they wanted the PEOPLE to be ARMED AS THE MILITARY, (Which they perceived as THE BAIN OF LIBERTY).
ReplyDeleteThe Anti-Gun crowd are forgetting, (or maybe their not), about TYRANNY!
That this guy was in the military and doesn't understand what he was sworn to 'UPHOLD AND DEFEND' is ludicris!
Prior restraint IS a bad thing in a free society, Paul, but we haven't been a truly free society for some years now.
ReplyDelete