Hi, Tim Richardson!   
   I read your message from 14.01.2016 19:28   
      
     ak>>>> Small arms is useless for that purpose.   
     TR>>> What makes you think all we've got is `small arms'?   
      
     ak>> If the army use tanks, bombers, satellite, drones, spying   
     ak>> equipment where can buy it? If you catch a tank it will be   
     ak>> destroyed by a bomber withing minutes.   
      
     TR> The cops in this country have military vehicles of sorts, even   
     TR> armored personnel carriers.   
      
     TR> One such up in Los Angeles was even equipped with a long battering   
     TR> ram for breaking down the heavily reinforced doors of drug houses.   
      
      
   I don't doubt that the cops are equipped very well. But we talk about    
   common people's "right to keep and bear arms ... to keep an armed    
   citizenry able to resist and overthrow a tyrannical government."   
      
      
     TR>>> Yeah well... we like our guns, and we don't give a hoot in hell   
     TR>>> what foreigners think about that.   
     ak>> Such thoughts are probably spoken not only by the foreigners.   
     ak>> There are many Americans who think that if people do not feel   
     ak>> themselves safe without feeling guns with their buttocks there is   
     ak>> something very wrong in such a country.   
      
     TR> And they would be those who not only don't mind living life on   
     TR> their knees, at the mercy of aggressors, but want everyone else to   
     TR> live life on their knees as well.   
      
     TR> Trouble is... pretty much all those who whine about ordinary   
     TR> Americans owning their own guns, standing at a microphone   
     TR> thundering against the Second Amendment, are usually surrounded by   
     TR> plain clothes body guards who are armed to the teeth!   
      
   The only hope is that they follow their promises given during the    
   election campaign. They could demand gun restriction on behalf their    
   electorate only. So democracy must show itself.   
      
     TR>>> Convicted felons, some misdemeanor convictions, and those who   
     TR>>> have been in mental institutions are usually caught in a   
     TR>>> background check for a firearm purchase.   
      
     ak>> If a person hasn't been in a mental hospital during his life it   
     ak>> doesn't mean he is healthy mentally. That is the way how nutcases   
     ak>> acquire submachine guns.   
      
     TR> So what?   
      
   The easier is a buying procedure the more chances for crazy persons to    
   get armed. So, a heavy restriction is not a bad idea. After all a    
   restriction is not a prohibition.   
      
      
     ak>> Do you think it would be good if people also carry sabers and   
     ak>> daggers? It is even less powerful weapon for self-defence than   
     ak>> guns.   
      
     TR> Islamic fanatics `go off' with swords and knives all the time,   
     TR> slashing and stabbing people. I'd prefer having a. 44 special in my   
     TR> pocket than a pocket knife in that scenario.   
      
   They can think in this way also.   
      
      
     TR> Not a single teacher was armed and able to engage a gunman who was   
     TR> `harming the children'.   
      
     TR> At Sandy Hook even the security guard was `un'armed! And the   
     TR> children died!   
      
   I think that the probability that a teacher will kill his students in    
   temper is higher than the probability he will defend them from a    
   terrorist. :) A teacher should be unarmed, as a researcher who is going    
   to study savages in the jungle. More chances for negotiations. :)   
      
   Bye, Tim!   
   Alexander Koryagin   
   fido7.debate 2016   
   --- FIDOGATE 5.1.7ds   
    * Origin: Pushkin's BBS (2:5020/2140.2)