>>>>>>Okay. Does a reasonable person think any individual civilian needs to own weapons that can fire 10's or 100's of shots per second?
>>>>>
>>>>>The bushmaster can not fire 10s of rounds per second. You should understand what you are talking about before spewing wrong information.
>>>>
>>>>Perhaps. Let me ask you a direct question. Do you think there are weapons that civilians should not be allowed to own? That is, can we find some common ground and work from there?
>>>>
>>>>Tamar
>>>
>>>Civilians are not allowed to own full auto weapons (like the press and you keep trying to imply were used in this case), cannons, bombs (larger than fireworks), flamethrowers, etc w/o BATF licensing/fees/background checks/storage requirements/etc.
>>>
>>>I don't have a problem with that.
>>
>>Great, common ground.
>>
>>To work from the other end, I don't have a problem with people owning hunting rifles and other weapons clearly intended for hunting or for the work of ranching and farming. (You have a vocabulary advantage here. I don't know, nor do I particularly want to know, the names of different kinds of guns.) I'm also not opposed to those living in isolated places having appropriate guns to protect themselves from dangerous animals.
>>
>>Can we find any more common ground? I'm open to hearing why individuals should have guns in other situations. Are you open to the possibility that there might be other weapons that shouldn't be in private ownership?
>>
>>Tamar
>
>Defense. I'll consider disarming when the government guarantees and absolutely demonstrates with no exceptions that I, my family, friends, and neighbors will never face a situation where someone is attempting to do us bodily harm - ever.
>
>Other than that, I will exercise my right of self defense.
>
>If I am put into a situation where I have to defend myself or someone else, I'll use the quickest and most effective means to do so. I'm not going to try to counsel whomever threatens me. I'm not going to wait for the gub-mint to rescue me (see recent massacres - that's worked real well). I'm not going to fight fair if I can help it.
>
>If others like yourself want to be victims instead, that is your right.

I doubt we'll find common ground on this particular issue. Everything I've ever seen indicates that the risks of having a gun in the own far outweigh the benefits. Thus, it's hard for me to see why anyone would take those risks.

Tamar