A Usenet persona calling itself KMAN wrote:
in article , rick at
wrote on 2/24/05 9:32 PM:
"KMAN" wrote in message
...
snippage...
IOW, you know you're beat and are trying to slither out of
admitting it. I'm
not going to do your homework for you. Besides, YOU are the
one who implied
substantial US deaths from "assault weapons," so it's up to
YOU to
substantiate that claim.
Unless there are no deaths from them, it doesn't matter. They
aren't needed
==============
According to whom????? You? You are hardly the arbiter of what
people need. If I were you, the first thing I'd do is look for
an education. Yours was sorely lacking. Maybe you should demand
your money back...
Whatever selfish but harmless reasons there might be for desiring to own an
assault weapon, they can't possibly outweight the benefits of not having
them available to those who wish to kill a lot of people quickly.
Of course they can, and do. The problem with your dubious logic is that it
is impossible to make firearms, including semi-automatic rifles, unavailable
to criminals. There are simply too many of them in the world They cannot all
be located, much less collected. Just as the Brits...they have a lot of
trouble doing that with the IRA, and they've been trying for about 800
years.
Given that fact of life, the only people you disarm when you ban and
confiscate guns are the law-abiding, innocent citizens who actually NEED,
and are entitled to have such arms in order to defend themselves against
criminals and tyrants.
That you cannot integrate these facts lends credence to the presumption that
you are merely trolling. Because if you aren't, you're too abysmally stupid
to live and are a Darwinian dead-end doomed to genetic obscurity.
--
Regards,
Scott Weiser
"I love the Internet, I no longer have to depend on
friends, family and co-workers, I can annoy people WORLDWIDE!" TM
© 2005 Scott Weiser