School shootings

[LA Ute]

“But I believe, on moral, practical and constitutional grounds, that no private citizen should own an automatic weapon or a semi-automatic weapon that can easily be modified for automatic effects. These are military weapons. Their purpose is to kill human beings. They’re not used for hunting (unless you want to destroy the animal’s meat). They’re lousy for target shooting. But they’re excellent tools for mass murder.”

— Retired Army officer and conservative pundit Ralph Peters.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/nypost....-everyone/amp/

[Diehard Ute]

“But I believe, on moral, practical and constitutional grounds, that no private citizen should own an automatic weapon or a semi-automatic weapon that can easily be modified for automatic effects. These are military weapons. Their purpose is to kill human beings. They’re not used for hunting (unless you want to destroy the animal’s meat). They’re lousy for target shooting. But they’re excellent tools for mass murder.”

— Retired Army officer and conservative pundit Ralph Peters.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/nypost....-everyone/amp/

And this is the debate that never gets a resolution.

For this argument second amendment supporters will always say “it doesn’t matter what we’ve developed”.

But I have a very hard time believing those who wrote the second amendment had any clue we’d develop a gun that can fire thousands of rounds a minute. Or guns and ammunition that can penetrate armor like butter.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk