I don't really know enough to say whether it is ok or not but we do know that the guy that got shot followed the other guy to his house. If someone that has been cutting me off and yelling at me follows me to my house I would be quite concerned. The shooter may have been able to handle it differently and the extra shots are troubling but Gonzalez had his family in the car and still did this, the shooter may be guilty but Gonzalez is still a moron.
Look up the meaning of subordinate clause. It's a mere rhetorical flourish, and has had exactly zero meaning until after the Miller decision (1939), when the early anti-gun nuts, (read racist Democrats trying to keep negroes from owning guns) read it in. And, if you had actually...you know...READ...the federalist papers you would have come across several passages that basically say...the end object is that every man be armed. I'll start with President Washington. The government may fall down on the training, but that does not take away from the underlying principle, that every CITIZEN ought to be armed.
Also not relevant. Neither are the anecdotal posts you make here. They prove nothing on the larger scale just as my post on the road rage incident proves nothing. The "underlying principal" of 250 years ago that every man had an obligation to defend the state is irrelevant to today's argument that anyone should be able to possess any type of weapon for their personal use. The federalist papers bear no weight in US law. I put in my time in defense of the nation in a much different society than anything that could have been foreseen by the framers of the Constitution.
So the homicidal maniac with the gun was disarmed and killed with his own weapon. Was he another "good guy with a gun?" Do you read these things before you post them?
anecdotal? these are real news events reported by real news outlets pretty much daily. people are defending themselves from criminals in this country with guns. sorry if it hurts your feelings.
an·ec·dot·al (ăn′ĭk-dōt′l) adj. 1. also an·ec·dot·ic (-dŏt′ĭk) or an·ec·dot·i·cal (-ĭ-kəl) Of, characterized by, or full of anecdotes. 2. Based on casual observations or indications rather than rigorous or scientific analysis: "There are anecdotal reports of children poisoned by hot dogs roasted over a fire of the [oleander] stems" (C. Claiborne Ray). What about the maniac with the gun you cited in an earlier anecdote who was shot by his potential victim? Until he was killed he would have been considered a good guy with a gun, right, because he had never been connected to any of his murders? Instead, he was actually another bad guy with a gun and we don't know how he got it. Was it legally? Are you okay with that?
you picked out the one link I shouldn't have included. i glazed over it while stopped in traffic and quickly posted in error. good for you.
So how many "good guy" stories do you have? And how many other bad guy stories are there? And why the fuck are you posting links while you're driving your car? Is it really that important to you? Don't run over any babies today looking for more links.
So now you're resorting to calling foul names because your argument is crumbling, tough guy? How very mature. What's next? Threatening me with a gun? If you are the driver of a motor vehicle you are violating the law if you are using your phone on the road, even if stopped at a traffic light.
what's your point? you're on here giving me a hard time about using my phone while stopped at a traffic light? Are you suggesting that's actually dangerous? If you think it is you're a bigger moron than I thought. I'm done with pointless back and forth with you.
The Founders understood Self Defense as a Natural Right. And against a tyrannical government, a Necessary one. If you don't get this. You're clueless.
How many bad guy stories do you have, and what exactly is their proportionality to the 330+ MILLION guns owned by Citizens of this great Republic?
