Originally Posted by eli783
Even if the Japanese were deterred by facing armed civilians, how is that relevant to our lives now? Is there really still a threat for invasion? Dont get me wrong, Im all for guns. But living in nyc, and being a VICTIM of the misuse of just one, Im all for heavier regulation of them all.
I think the issue with a lot issues like this are results of emotions. I can only think of emotions, not logic, would allow someone to come to the conclusion that you did, but perhaps I'm wrong. So, I ask this sincerely, if the person who did you wrong had a knife, would you feel any differently about knives? Why?
I know a woman who was a victim of a home invasion. Two men broke into her home mid day, she ended up shooting one of them. She's pro gun now more than ever and in my state, she had issues even getting the gun in the first place (due to a misdemeanor that was thrown out), and we doubt if there were more regulations that she would have even got it in the first place. Should she, and the vast majority of legal gunners owners (I'm guessing 98-99%) who are peaceful have more issues getting guns via heavier regulations to deter the 1-2%? Feel free to challenge my numbers.
I don't know what occurred so I'll throw out a situation that happened to a friend of mine, he was jumped by a group of kids, one of which walked up behind him, and put a knife to his throat and made a couple demands. If you were in this situation, would you want knives regulated? If the punk with the knife had a gun instead, would you call for more gun regulations?