Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Bugfatty Why should guns be treated on a "need to have" basis when the 2nd amendment clearly says "shall not be infringed." |
So tell me are there any limits to the "2nd amendment?
What stops you owning a Bradley for "self defense" or maybe a small tactical nuke to ensure your safety when walking the streets, hell MAD worked during the cold war why not extend it to civilians "One funny look from a thug and boom 6 city blocks leveled bet he wont do that again."
Where does "want to have" make way for "too dangerous to own"?