@SeanR I'm very eager for you to present to me one example of a libertarian utopia that exists today and is thriving (hint: the former doesn't exist anywhere, so neither does the latter). And I'm absolutely convinced you would not live in Russia or Sudan if offered. I've spent time in both St. Petersburg and Khartoum, and your kind wouldn't last five minutes.
I already stated what one of the biggest flaws in your thinking is, and you just confirmed it again. You hold the right to own a gun in equal light to the right to free speech, religion, protest, privacy, etc. simply because it's in the Constitution. Had the right to bear arms been absent, I don't think you'd be taking your privilege to own a firearm so seriously. Had none of the aforementioned been guaranteed to us, I don't think you'd consider owning a gun to be as important as the freedom to say what you want. Not unless you're power hungry.
Third, you express a distrust of the government and use this as a justification for your desire to possess a gun. The government is run by people. People are regulated in the developed world by laws because they act within their own best interest when such legislation doesn't exist. Now imagine if everyone in the country had a gun. How could they further their own interests with a gun in their hand? It's your, and everyone's, responsibility to elect those who represent us and not themselves. So far, most of this pathetic country has done a terrible job of doing this. Congress has an 11% approval rating and a 96% re-election rate. But I digress. Absolutely nowhere else in the developed world are so many people as a percentage of our population killed unnecessarily by guns. And much of the reason is because this country has a sick obsession with guns and is the only such country to guarantee every one of its citizens something to kill people with.
And finally, even if the second amendment was intended to provide citizens with access to arms equivalent to those used by the military, how is this relevant today? The military provides soldiers with these very weapons, and there is no need for them outside the battlefield. You can use a rifle for hunting and sport, or a pistol for self defense. But absolutely nobody outside the military has any business with an AK or an AR15.
29
@SeanR I'm very eager for you to present to me one example of a libertarian utopia that exists today and is thriving (hint: the former doesn't exist anywhere, so neither does the latter). And I'm absolutely convinced you would not live in Russia or Sudan if offered. I've spent time in both St. Petersburg and Khartoum, and your kind wouldn't last five minutes.
I already stated what one of the biggest flaws in your thinking is, and you just confirmed it again. You hold the right to own a gun in equal light to the right to free speech, religion, protest, privacy, etc. simply because it's in the Constitution. Had the right to bear arms been absent, I don't think you'd be taking your privilege to own a firearm so seriously. Had none of the aforementioned been guaranteed to us, I don't think you'd consider owning a gun to be as important as the freedom to say what you want. Not unless you're power hungry.
Third, you express a distrust of the government and use this as a justification for your desire to possess a gun. The government is run by people. People are regulated in the developed world by laws because they act within their own best interest when such legislation doesn't exist. Now imagine if everyone in the country had a gun. How could they further their own interests with a gun in their hand? It's your, and everyone's, responsibility to elect those who represent us and not themselves. So far, most of this pathetic country has done a terrible job of doing this. Congress has an 11% approval rating and a 96% re-election rate. But I digress. Absolutely nowhere else in the developed world are so many people as a percentage of our population killed unnecessarily by guns. And much of the reason is because this country has a sick obsession with guns and is the only such country to guarantee every one of its citizens something to kill people with.
And finally, even if the second amendment was intended to provide citizens with access to arms equivalent to those used by the military, how is this relevant today? The military provides soldiers with these very weapons, and there is no need for them outside the battlefield. You can use a rifle for hunting and sport, or a pistol for self defense. But absolutely nobody outside the military has any business with an AK or an AR15.