Page 2 of 2
Re: NYT Editorial - This will make you angry
Posted: Tue Nov 30, 2010 4:26 pm
by Dragonfighter
Wow, I made it almost two paragraphs before vomiting.
Re: NYT Editorial - This will make you angry
Posted: Tue Nov 30, 2010 10:13 pm
by Venus Pax
PappaGun wrote:"Beyond the dubious legal claims, the idea that young individuals ages 18 to 20 have a constitutional right to buy weapons and carry them loaded and concealed in public is breathtakingly irresponsible. "
My 19-year-old sister just left for Air Force basic training. Should we call them and let them know that giving her a weapon & training would be breathtakingly irresponsible.
Re: NYT Editorial - This will make you angry
Posted: Tue Nov 30, 2010 10:30 pm
by Pawpaw
Venus Pax wrote:PappaGun wrote:"Beyond the dubious legal claims, the idea that young individuals ages 18 to 20 have a constitutional right to buy weapons and carry them loaded and concealed in public is breathtakingly irresponsible. "
My 19-year-old sister just left for Air Force basic training. Should we call them and let them know that giving her a weapon & training would be breathtakingly irresponsible.
And on top of that, they're gonna MAKE her shoot a REAL assault rifle!
Re: NYT Editorial - This will make you angry
Posted: Wed Dec 01, 2010 9:53 am
by alvins
i think their is a difference.
sure you can be issued a gun in the millitary at 18 but not before they give you some training and you are still supervised quite a bit.
if just any 18 -20 year old goes out and buys a gun I dont see the same amount of supervision or training.
On the other hand my brother in law who is in the navy. I took him out to the range over thankgiving. he told me they had quite a bit of rifle training and bascially figured you knew how to use a hand gun. maybe army or marines is different(i have no idea).