In article ,
DSK wrote:
"Jonathan Ganz" wrote
The long guns you're talking about have folding stocks and flash
suppressors.
There is no good reason for "honest citizens" to own these things without
a permit.

A "permit" to own a paramilitary weapon? WTF? First you say there is no
good reason for them, then you want to issue permits for people to do so?

Frankly, I think you've got it exactly backwards... there is no reason
for the gov't to restrict their ownership. A citizen should be allowed
to buy & own whatever he wants & can afford... from motorcycles to
electric guitars. It is the misuse of these items that is a problem for
the community and thus becomes an issue for the gov't to address.

I have no problem with banning convicted felons, or ex-wife stalkers,
from owning firearms. Makes good sense to me. However, I have a big
problem with the gov't telling me what I can and can't do, when I have a
lifelong record of good citizenship.

Considering the number of fatalities & severe injuries around the home,
perhaps you'd advocate banning, or requiring permits, to own such things
as lawn mowers & certain types of cleaning supplies?

Cars kill far more people than guns, and yet we make little or no effort
to restrict their use.

I don't think there is any good reason to own them, but since I'm not
in charge, I think people have a right to believe what they want. If
they think they have a legitimate reason, then apply for a permit. If
the authorities agree, then fine.

The public good outweighs any individual's supposed rights to keep a
paramilitary weapon. It might be a priviledge, but no such right
exists.
--
Jonathan Ganz (j gan z @ $ail no w.c=o=m)
http://www.sailnow.com
"If there's no wind, row."