"Jeff Morris" wrote


OK, let me think. Hmmmmmm. Yup, I thought on it. Its still a
stupid
analogy. I'm just pointing out that although the standard argument
is
that guns are "needed for protection" but in fact, the gun you bring
into the house is far more likely to used to kill a family member
than
protect against an intruder.


The guns in my house are more likely to do neither.


In my mind, the "abusing people" are the idiots that insist a heavy
machine gun or and assault weapon are also necessary for "home
protection".

Machine gun? Were we talking about machine guns? hey, I'd love to
own a .50 MG, take it outback, shoot the hell outa one of the pick
ups. Would you have a problem with that?