Post
Topic
Board Politics & Society
Re: Gun freedom advocates - what weapons shouldn't be legally available?
by
organofcorti
on 05/01/2013, 09:04:50 UTC
So you like guns.

I'm interested in knowing what weapons, body armour and other high tech gadgetry you think should be allowed to the general public. This is for me a very interesting question because most people will have limits, even if that limit is a nuclear weapon. The limits various people have help me understand their political beliefs better.
I think you've kind of guaranteed a useless answer by using the term "general public". Any weapon should be available to anyone who meets the reasonable requirements for owning such a weapon, whether it be a hammer or a nuclear bomb. There is no reason to draw a line at some arbitrary point rather than imposing reasonable requirements on ownership of all weapons. I can't imagine how any person might meet reasonable requirements for a nuclear bomb, if that helps.


I was just thinking something similar when I responded to the second post, so I've changed OP. I personally do believe that in no circumstance any private individual should be allowed unfettered access to and ownership of a nuclear device. Even if a they were able to satisfactorily protect their family and the weapon, any risk of a previously undiagnosed mental illness leading the owner to use the weapon is too great a risk.