Return to “Govt working to ban weaponized drones”
My question was polite, respectful and valid.. that you can only respond with snide personally derogatory language is as telling as anything you might have otherwise said.joe817 wrote:I will leave the issue to the arm chair commandos & spec ops types to continue the argument. Thanks to all that responded.
You used a hunting reference in your argument twice in just 1 paragraph... WHY? the 2nd amendment has nothing to do with hunting, so why reference it in your argument?joe817 wrote:What in the world was that about?Soccerdad1995 wrote:If you look at the Declaration of Independence along with the 2nd Amendment it is pretty clear that the RKBA is not just about hunting or safety from petty criminals. Not that I would expect the King and his ministers to acknowledge this.
I predict that anyone opposed to a government monopoly on these and other weapons will be roundly labeled as "crazy" and "dangerous". The subjects have been completely subdued at this point, and as a result, the armament gap becomes the rulers and the ruled in this country is much, much greater than it was when our founders felt it was necessary to write the 2nd Amendment. Let's just hope the rulers are gentle......
Why in Heavens Name would anyone WANT a weponized drone??? To shoot a deer, coyote, feral hog, etc, etc, etc anonymously, from afar? Not very sporting, I would say. Nope, no way, I say. To me, it's like complaining that the average U.S. citizen is denied the right to purchase a Stinger Missile. IMO, the thought process is the same. How about an Abram's tank to go dove hunting?
