I think that argument is irrelevant though. The framers were specific when they spoke of these arms being of a current military style, and that the people be capable of defeating the government if need be.
I've never understood, considering the depth of available writings of the times, why the 2nd amendment is considered so less important than the other rights by so many people. It is the one that safeguards all the others. > -----Original Message----- > From: Judah McAuley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, November 10, 2008 6:54 PM > To: cf-community > Subject: Re: Obama coming after the guns > > On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 3:36 PM, Scott Stroz > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I used to feel the same way about assault rifles and I heard an > > argument that I really could not rebut. 'The bad guys don't care > > about gun control and what is legal or illegal. If they can get > > assault rifles, either legally or illegally, I want to be > able to get one to 'even the fight' ' > > > > For me, its hard to argue with that logic. It would be > difficult to > > defend yourself effectively with a handgun or shotgun when the bad > > guys may have assault rifles. > > This argument has some appeal but I don't know if it really holds up. > Chances are the average person who is going to be using a gun > in self defense isn't out on patrol, waiting for an attack. > If there were equal preparation between the attacker and the > person being attacked, I can see how the disparity if > firepower might be decisive. But if you are at home and > asleep, I don't know that a fully-automatic uzi is going to > be more useful to you than a pistol. > > I suppose that if you just started firing off, you are going > to have a slightly higher chance of hitting your target > somehow (if you are > trained) with a fully automatic weapon (or even > semi-automatic) than a semi-automatic pistol or rifle. But by > the same token you are much more likely to hit things you > aren't really aiming at. Assault weapons have a tendency to > sacrifice accuracy for number of shots. And when you are > defending your own home, the things you don't really mean to > hit are much more meaningful than if you are the one doing > the assault. > > The bad guys may have assault rifles, this is true. But in a > home defense situation, I don't know that you really want to > be starting a firefight. I figure you either have been made > aware of the situation and know someone is in your house or > you are caught totally unawares. > If you know something is going on, then you probably have > close to the same odds with a pistol I'd guess. And as for > deterrent value, a gun is a gun I'd say. The homeowner can > kill you as an intruder or they can't. And if you aren't > aware of the situation, I'd say that having an assault rifle > increases the chances of unintended consequences in a panic situation. > > So either way, I think that assault rifles make sense for > assault situations and war zones but not so much for home defense. > > My 0.02 > > Judah > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Adobe® ColdFusion® 8 software 8 is the most important and dramatic release to date Get the Free Trial http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;207172674;29440083;f Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:279775 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
