Being able to use a gun in a controlled environment is fine (shooting ranges) or when it's needed for work (farmers) - but the average Joe has no business owning a weapon of any kind.Not nice at all.
I see the 'ban everything to do with guns' lot are out in force #hand clap# Just because you have no need for firearms (all types, including air guns) doesn't mean that everyone else has no need for them.
It's great to see that the VCRA has worked so well in removing air guns from yobs. Maybe the proposed licensing in Scotland might work better. I'm still undecided :/
Being able to use a gun in a controlled environment is fine (shooting ranges) or when it's needed for work (farmers) - but the average Joe has no business owning a weapon of any kind.
The rights of people not wanting to get shot supersede the rights of a people wanted to own a gun for fun.
To make up for having a small manhood.
The two are not remotely comparable.As to your second point -In that case I say the rights of my daughter to walk down the street with out getting run over supersedes your right to own a motorised vehicle.
I haven't had any complaints from your mum/sister/ girlfriend/ etc about my size.![]()
The two are not remotely comparable.
The population requires transportation, it doesn't require firearms.
yeah.... I thought floor was apparently the lowest you can get, but you proved me otherwise.
Well if you're going to come up with a childish generalisation then ill come back with a childish insult
I agree - both statements are equally irrational.
I disagree. One statement is essentially very rational, the other (read; yours) was utterly ridiculous and a poor counter argument.
The two are not remotely comparable.
The population requires transportation, it doesn't require firearms.