40有理由支持槍支管制

清單的40有理由支持槍支管制，現在相當長。邁克爾威廉姆森把大量時間和精力到維護這種寶貴的參考自由愛好者。

這令人感到驚訝什麼人相信相信在槍支管制

由Michael卓威廉姆森

這一事件，人們打出罪犯自衛是非常罕見的，並且不應當被用來作為藉口，自己的槍，就像事件，總統新聞秘書被槍殺是非常罕見的，並且不應當被用來作為藉口，禁止槍。
這槍的真正原因是犯罪，但我們將引咎監獄的業主說，槍的犯罪，即使業主沒有參與的人。
一個丑角將殺了你，在半秒鐘需要借鑒的皮套，但不會傷害你，而你撥打911的手機，通話的調度，並等待一個半小時的警察到達。
這槍的控制工程，這就是為什麼不存在非法武器在北愛爾蘭或貝魯特。
，第二次修訂只適用於flintlocks ，正如美國憲法第一修正案只適用於quills和鉛字。
，適當的回應攻擊是要叫警察，只是手無寸鐵的警察，因為“沒有解決任何暴力行為。 ”
這是錯誤的，使譏諷，歧視婦女的意見，除非評論誰對婦女自己的槍。
這槍的11發彈彈匣是危險的，但槍15 10輪雜誌是更加安全。
我們應該恢復罪犯對待他們的人，但從來沒有讓他們自己的槍，即使他們的犯罪是非暴力的。
一個劫機者很可能採取槍遠離試點，但數百名乘客隨後將無法槍遠離劫機者。
如果有希望被槍乘坐美洲航空公司93號航班，有人可能會受到傷害。
飛行員有足夠的做在駕駛艙內，而不必擔心干擾像槍支停止劫機者和滅火器阻止大火，這些活動應由“訓練有素的專業人士。 ”
這種“訓練有素的專業人士”將僅在一次飛行中的五個。
這不是有試點的人類生命危險拍攝的劫機者，我們應該僅僅是空軍擊落的飛機，從而維護生命。
這強姦犯願意攻擊武裝婦女，以便他們能夠採取的槍支，並利用它們對受害者。
1槍支所有者將在10000犯下的暴力行為，在他或她的一生，這是更為可怕的超過了25 ％的司機誰會造成嚴重或致命的事故。
您應該依靠警察，以代替您的槍，就像你要依靠牙醫代替牙刷。
報告說，按射擊是“負責任的” ，但沒有報告說，射擊是停止武裝衝突公民是企圖防止“美化槍。 ”
這車鑰匙，雨傘和發膠是好的工具，是為了自衛，儘管警察繼續攜帶槍支。
華盛頓特區的謀殺案率低80.6每100000是由於嚴格的槍支管制，但弗吉尼亞州阿靈頓的高謀殺率的百分之一點六100000的原因是缺乏槍支管制。
該抑鬱和情緒不安不應該允許自己的槍，開槍子彈二百五十零英尺-英鎊的能源，但應該讓自己的四○○○磅汽車一百十三點六萬英尺-英鎊的能源（ 65英里）。
這種“攻擊性武器”是“非常強大” ，但奇怪的大遊戲獵人喜歡0.30 - 06秒和0.375漢鼎敏。
這種步槍是“不足”的狩獵，但可以“衝警察防彈衣。 ” 更強大的獵槍，但是，不能。
我們應該取締防彈背心，使犯罪分子無法使用他們，和公民個人應當然後感到自豪的是，交火中喪生，知道他們在做自己的社會。
，我們並不需要的第二項修正案或武器來保護我們的憲法，而應利用法院和政府系統，就像我們在1776年。
，缺乏提槍在遺囑殖民地美國城市的證明，大多數美國人並沒有他們自己的，就像沒有提及outhouses證明，大多數人蹲在院子裡。
據稱，這是缺乏所有權有關的第二次修訂的缺乏興趣的報紙當時有關憲法第一修正案。
，在數以百計的記錄案件反槍怪胎我們注意到：新聞秘書被逮捕手槍控制在直流履行非法手槍，排名區域主任萬倫3月被裁定重罪攻擊，和其他百萬低能在科羅拉多州被逮捕攻擊槍支經銷商和活動，但“槍堅果”是“沉迷於暴力。 ”
該法律的具體命名武器已被發現不符合憲法，該法對“類型”的武器已被認為是含糊不清，使法律對化妝品的功能很容易遵守仍然產生相同的機制，並針對特定的法律機制是違憲的，這表明了“ obsessiveness ”槍支愛好者做他們喜歡做，對意願的狹隘prudes誰希望阻止他們，而不是說明obsessiveness的無知偏執狂誰害怕他們。
美國航天局，軍事，生理學家，解剖學家和培訓人員都同意和奧林匹克分數確認男子平均有極大更多上肢力量比女性，但女性應盡量為自己辯護的武術，而不是槍。
根據調查報告，警報系統的價格昂貴，往往很容易失敗，報警公司可能無法應付3個小時，即使在那時只有駕駛的，而不是停止，而是一個警報系統是一個更可靠的手段保護家庭比槍支。
不太槍支爭吵是一件好事，所以你不應該武裝衝突對刑事犯罪保持自己的安全。
這不是花幾百美元的槍支和一個下午學習如何使用它，而不是一個應該花費數千美元和幾年來學習武術，所以你會做好充分準備，以打擊任何人，只要他們在您的性別分工和重量級。
這是可怕的工廠時，警察對嫌疑人的武器，使他們能逮捕，但我們應該有更嚴厲的法律武器，相信警察不會濫用他們以這種方式。
警察到達八十英里每小時是一種更好的方式來阻止罪犯比子彈到達八〇〇英里每小時。
，由於在俄克拉何馬城爆炸案的刀點劫持9月11日，我們應採取槍遠離人誰沒有參與。
一名警官說， 21歲以下不能購買槍下班使用，因為他的能力取決於此藍色外套。
人們購買槍支作為“替代虎鞭” ，因為他們知道，只有人與小陰莖以往任何時候都獲得攻擊罪犯。
希特勒和斯大林沒有解除公民，只有猶太人，吉普賽人，同性戀者，工會和其他“不受歡迎” 。（是的，一個自由的力學會員表示，這實際上在華盛頓郵報引述www.potomac - inc.org 。）
要正確理解納粹槍支管制，必須考慮到“合理擔心”他們的猶太居民。（這是另一個自封自由。我開始懷疑。）
這對有孩子的家庭不應該允許自己的槍，為安全起見，就像他們不允許自己的狗，電動工具，或有毒化學品。
這是錯誤的，以破壞別人的生活行政犯罪的監禁和貧困家庭，除非該犯罪是擁有一支槍。
這一項法律，允許某人保持這樣的“ X ”的法律已經多年，在面對另一個嚴重成文法說他們不能做的“ Y ” ，是一個“漏洞” 。
這是錯誤的政治，世界貿易中心的攻擊並不需要槍劫持飛機，但好政治的科倫殺手...非法購買槍支。
，當有人去世，因為他們不能得到藥物，政府也不會批准，這是悲慘的，但如果有人死亡，因為他們不能保衛自己的郡政府也不會批准，這就是生活。
這是某種犯罪的威脅更大了會議，而不是一個經常的人，所以警方需要槍和普通市民沒有。
這槍是一種象徵，白色的男性壓迫，我們應該解決這個禁止廉價槍支，也可向貧困少數民族，槍不到六英鎊觸發拉這是可用的女性和男性小，需要特別的存儲和許可費，以一站式“的那些人”由他們提供，要求證明“需要” ，如政治關係或大面積或錢去昂貴之旅，而這一切將停止這些邪惡的白人男性。
各國政府應堅持“合法壟斷武力” ，因為美國革命家，在Maquissards ，以色列在巴勒斯坦和北方聯盟在阿富汗是“非法的” ，但希特勒，毛澤東，波爾布特，墨索里尼和斯大林是“合法的。 ”
認為“合理”使用的槍是狩獵和射擊，但不是自衛。換言之，這是可以接受的，把他們當作玩具而不是作為救生設備。
這0.50口徑的步槍都是“極為罕見的”和“賣hotcakes 。 ”
這一個事實，即0.50口徑步槍是非常罕見的理由禁止他們，就像罕見Lamborghinis和其它高性能汽車的理由禁止他們。
這人有道義上的義務，使公民的逮捕時，人們看到有重罪的進展，並應完成的犯罪行為人大喊大叫， “住手！不然我就大叫'一站式'了！ ” 而不是利用的武器。
這聰明人應該支持槍支管制，因為他們意識到他們太愚蠢到相信槍。
這槍只是不夠取代陰莖，因此，當襲擊，丑角應撤出了...
這槍是一個象徵性的陰莖...什麼這與捍衛自己的生活我不知道。它只是為了證明，反防禦精神科醫生顯然弗洛伊德問題，他們需要解決。
如果誠實的人們放棄他們的武器，罪犯和獨裁者將放棄他們，因為芝加哥街頭幫派和希特勒已經證明。
只有政府應控制槍支一樣，只有政府應控制廣播，只有政府應控制宗教。
一個演員從好萊塢誰點一支槍在朋友和敵人而不歧視，誰保持手指扣在扳機上，沒有目標，誰火一把手槍在其側，誰火災兩支槍Akimbo公司，誰試圖打出一個單一行動手槍以降低錘，誰火災60投30發彈彈匣，應作為一個專家關於這個問題的。
這“合理的許可費”將停止休閒所有權的槍，但任何人誰會跳火圈，以擁有一支槍是強迫。
這是非法攜帶槍支將阻止人們這樣做，就像降低車速限制停止魯莽駕駛。
我們應該處理的問題，罪犯使用非法武器，採取合法的武器以外的老實人。
我們應該禁止槍，如果這樣可以節省甚至生命，這是值得的，正如我們應該禁止集會，人們可能會踐踏致死，如果這樣可以節省一個生命，這是值得的，我們應該禁止的團體誰講話違反公共秩序，如果這樣可以節省一個生命，這是值得的，我們應該禁止不健康的食品，如果這樣可以節省一個生命，這是值得的，並...
任何人被定罪的家庭暴力不應該允許處理槍，除非該犯罪是“ Marky ”馬克沃爾伯格處理槍支“猩球。 ”
這種步槍是無用的世界戰鬥機和核武器，就像汽車是無用的世界747 。
這天空馬紹爾群島，誰是目前的不到10 ％的航班，是一個很好的解決劫機事件，但武裝的飛行員，誰在場的每飛行，卻不是。
一個試點可能意外打出一個洞， 0.38口徑的飛機，從而造成某種神秘一點〇〇〇萬立方英尺空氣中消失了一會兒，或觸及關鍵電線不知這是不是重複的另一安全，儘管聯邦政府要求該效果，但“訓練空軍馬歇爾”不會做到這一點，即使在緊張的戰鬥對劫機者。
飛行員可能會意外地打出了一個洞皮膚的飛機（見上文），因此不應該有槍，如果恐怖分子開始撞了，我們就會有希望做到最好。
飛行員不應武裝，因為它們沒有訓練使用武器，但也可能使用暴力演習，他們沒有訓練，以確保某種神奇劫機者，他們無法看到他的座位上。
一個.38口徑的子彈可能摧毀飛機，但暴力演習不會撕裂的翅膀起飛。
拍攝的試點，通過一個小駕駛艙門在傳入劫機者migh某種不施加任何子彈，但他在看到一百一十磅乘務員將輕鬆獲得足夠接近解決劫機者和使用電槍。
恐怖可能偽裝成一個“受信任的旅行者” ，希望是唯一的人乘坐的槍支，但將永遠無法假冒，執法人員找到工作，或作為一個試點。
一個沒有受過訓練的飛行員在對付恐怖分子，因此應該留在駕駛艙內。相反，它的行動的乘務員和乘客的處理情況。畢竟，他們是訓練有素的專業人員。
這只是一個時間的問題，直到發生劫持，並沒有什麼我們可以做的東西，不，你不能攜帶槍支。
許多“第二修正案的支持者權利”贊同“合理的槍支管制， ”就像許多“第一修正案的支持者權利”贊同“合理的媒體控制。 ”
保持一支槍自衛意味著希望拍攝某人一樣，保持比賽並業主保險意味著願望是縱火犯。
一個朋克喚醒一個上午，並認為， “哎呀，不是搶劫，強姦， sodomizing和殺害一名年輕女子，為什麼不我想談談我的槍在400美元的20美元和比薩餅和麥當勞去工作嗎？ ”
這更無助您，您的安全由罪犯。
你應該讓盜匪你的錢包，因為他並不真的想要你開槍，他會告訴你，但你應該給他你的錢包，因為他會拍你如果您沒有。
儘管所有的憤怒對企業美國的傲慢的員工待遇，達美樂比薩的需求，員工是手無寸鐵的是一種利他主義的努力，以阻止他們傷害自己，而不是計算金融出價，以避免了訴訟死強盜的家人。
該郡的業主是“潛在的恐怖分子” ，因為他們擁有所有必要的設備，就像薩拉布雷迪是一個“潛在的妓女” ，因為她有一切必要的設備。
你可以起訴一家商店有一個光滑的地板，天花板下降，和夏普的角落，但如果他們拒絕，讓您攜帶一支槍和你拍攝的犯罪，他們是不負責執行這一規則與他人。
沒有權利自衛，和警察在法律上沒有義務回應我呼救時，解除武裝，但你可以起訴他們，如果他們採取太長去的一宗交通意外。
該武裝的警察只是“升級的暴力行為” ，因此要真正有效，我們應該禁止使用nightsticks警察。事實上，我們應該禁止警察。如果他們不存在，罪犯不會需要武裝。事實上，我們不應該有鎖的門，因為這只是鼓勵強行進入。
這衝鋒槍過於強大的追捕鹿，麋鹿，太危險，公民個人擁有，但也無能為力的現代戰爭，太弱，無法可靠地殺死士兵，並沒有任何地位的概念，公民儲備。
有沒有不協調的人的首選武器，毒品交易商是25美元.22口徑袖珍手槍，並聲稱的首選武器，毒品交易商是$ 2000機槍在同一塊宣傳。
任何便宜的武器是一種“特殊的星期六晚上， ”和任何昂貴的武器是一種“攻擊的武器。 ”
說， “警察”和其他節目的編輯，以顯示無聊遇到交通站及偶爾喝醉酒的傻瓜的左輪手槍在他的口袋裡，並沒有表現出數以百萬計的情況下，警察正在射殺成群結隊的機槍toting毒販。
說： “紐約市警察局藍色”和“邁阿密風雲”的紀錄片。
這入侵者將無行為能力的催淚瓦斯或烤箱噴塗，但如果拍攝的0.44 Magnum將對生氣您的報復和殺死你。
槍支在手中的私人公民的最嚴重威脅世界和平，中國，巴基斯坦和韓國可以信任與核武器。
這查爾頓赫斯頓主席的全國步槍協會是一個抬價誰應該被忽視，但邁克爾道格拉斯的代表手槍控制公司是一個和平大使誰有權觀眾在聯合國武器控制問題。
普通的人，在場的槍，變成屠夫屠宰，並恢復正常時，核武器被刪除。
有人誰沒有明確他的武器，不點它放在一個安全的方向發展，拉動了扳機不檢查室，並打擊了他的腳是一個例子，說明即使是“訓練有素的專業”可以是一個“受害者”的惡魔槍，但人民軍隊的武器誰清理數以百萬計的一年沒有受到傷害是“啞巴過日子。 ”
新英格蘭醫學雜誌充滿了專家諮詢有關槍支，就像槍和彈藥的一些優秀論文的心臟手術。
任何人都不應協商的汽車安全帶安全工程師，土木工程師的一個更好的橋樑，為脊髓神經外科癱瘓，計算機程序員的Y2K問題，和薩拉布雷迪槍支的專門知識。
現代設計的槍支控制的功能，如玻璃鋼框雜誌和股票，這是用於軍事目的，不應該提供給平民，就像現代設計汽車包含的功能，如齒輪齒條式轉向和麥克弗森支柱，這是專為賽道不應該提供給平民。
這種步槍如線AR - 15 ， AK - 47步槍和L1 - A1s被用於軍事射擊和不應該提供給平民，就像汽車一樣雪佛蘭Suburbans ，吉普車，越野車和設計的武器平台和軍事用途和不應該提供給平民。
的最佳途徑，以避免發生意外槍擊事件是保持完全無知的槍和從來沒有在他們的身邊，就像最安全的方式，以避免發生意外溺水是完全無知的住宿和游泳永遠不會近水。
，最好的事情我們的孩子可以做惡霸和毒販是“只說沒有” ，並反擊，最好的一件事我們可以做歹徒和惡棍是給他們50元，等待他們走開。
這是令人不能容忍的密爾沃基警方45分鐘的報告作出回應的杰弗裡Dahmer的最後受害者奔跑裸體在寒冷的，然後返回他的攻擊者沒有檢查身份證，但最好的一個公民可以做是在緊急情況下撥打911 。
說， “人民享有和平集會” ， “正確的人是安全的家園” ， “本文所列舉的某些權利不得被解釋為貶低他人的人保留了” ， “權力不能授予此處保留給國分別和人民“ ，是指個人，而是”人民有權持有和攜帶武器“指的是國家。
這第2次修訂，批准了1791年，允許各國有一個國民衛隊設立的國會法案，於1916年。
該國民警衛隊，支付由聯邦政府，佔財產租賃給聯邦政府，使用武器的擁有由聯邦政府，懲罰入侵者根據聯邦法律，是一個國家機構。
儘管1990年案件明尼蘇達州州長魯迪Perpich與美國國防部，在最高法院裁定特別指出，國民警衛隊是根據聯邦訂單和國家總督不能反對，國民警衛隊仍然是，事實上，一國民兵。
說，公民個人不能有手槍，因為它們沒有民兵的目的，儘管軍方已數以十萬計的人，和公民個人不能有突擊步槍，因為他們是軍事武器。
這是合理的，加州的最低刑期為2年，但不使用擁有一支突擊步槍，以及合理的加利福尼亞州有6個月的最低刑期為強姦一名女警官。
這是合理的加州獲得兩年監禁的嚴重罪行如擁有，但不使用核武器，並緩刑的未成年人犯罪，如性騷擾你的子女。
這是合理的監獄人攜帶槍支，但沒有使用，但令人髮指的監獄人藏有大麻。
最低判決違反公民權利，除非這是藏有一支槍。
這門到門搜索毒品是一種嚴重侵犯公民權利和法西斯主義的跡象，但挨家挨戶搜尋槍是一種合理的解決辦法“槍的問題。 ”
第一修正案絕對讓兒童色情製品和威脅要殺死警察，但並不適用於手冊槍維修。
死刑不是犯罪的威懾，但槍控制。
一名女子在microskirt ，香水和Wonderbra ，沒有內衣，是一個無助的受害者，但有人獲得付款600小時提供現金快餐地方銀行在同一時間是每天晚上， “要求它。 “ 您將不會允許任何人攜帶槍支。
這伊利諾伊'法，讓幾乎所有的政府官員向總督dogcatcher攜帶槍支是合理的，法律禁止任何私人公民，即使是與死亡威脅的50個文件和100萬美元珠寶生意攜帶了槍支是合理的。和它不是一個跡象警察stateism 。
這80個宗教kooks在韋科威脅到美國安全，但狙擊手殺害他們，他們離開大樓， machinegunning兒童，隱藏的錄像證據，可能燒毀建設的目的，並在任何情況下，提出在美國聯邦法院是好的執法。和它不是一個跡象警察stateism 。
，言論自由的權利人自己的報紙，發報機，電腦，打字機，但只有自衛理由赤手空拳。
隨著上述情況，有90名婦女的LB攻擊300的LB強姦犯和他的300的LB好友，有“權”要殺死他們的自衛，只要她用她的雙手。
有沒有在憲法中明確禁止禁止某些槍，但也有一些是在憲法中明確禁止禁止某些性行為。
這槍的安全課程，學校只鼓勵孩子實施暴力，但在學校的性教育不鼓勵孩子們發生性關係。
有某個犯罪將槍遠離您，並使用它來對付你，所以反過來說，最好的辦法是威脅時採取的犯罪的槍遠離他和我們對他的好感。
這容易獲得槍支今天，只有少數幾個政府的形式，等待時間，支票，侵權，身份證，和指紋，負責所有的校園槍擊事件，而缺乏校園槍擊事件在1950年和1960年的，這是所造成的尷尬情況槍支在任何五金店，加油站和郵購。
我們必須擺脫槍瘋狂的瘋子，因為可能會就槍擊事件在任何時候，但只要誰擁有槍支的恐懼，這樣的瘋子是妄想。
有太多的暴力行為具有明確的槍在電視上，但城市可以起訴槍支製造商，因為人們不知道所涉及的危險槍支。
槍桿子遊說試圖運行一個“請勿觸摸”的宣傳運動的孩子處理槍是宣傳和反槍遊說試圖運行一個“請勿觸摸”運動負責社會活動。
說的犯罪率正在下降，因為美國的槍支管制，但犯罪增加，需要更多的槍支管制。
100年成立後，進入了全國步槍協會的政治槍從純粹自私的動機，和100年後的解放宣言，黑人民權運動的成立，從純粹的高尚動機。
統計顯示高謀殺率證明槍支管制，統計數字顯示，越來越多的謀殺率是在槍支管制立法是“公正的統計資料。 ”
我們不需要槍對暴虐的政府，因為憲法內部保障，所以我們應該抓住一切禁令和槍，因此違反了第2 ，第4 ，第5和第9次修訂的憲法，並不會因此成為一個暴虐的政府。
這槍是一個無效的手段自衛的合理成年人，但手中的一個無知犯罪成為威脅到社會結構。
這槍是如此複雜，使用這種特殊的訓練是必要的正確使用，但使用簡單，他們使謀殺容易。
這槍有助於高死亡率和應被禁止，但煙草和酒精是好的。
這一槍導致犯罪，這就是為什麼從來沒有發生過大規模殺害在槍查看。
這一槍導致犯罪，就像火柴引起縱火。
這一槍導致犯罪，就像婦女事業賣淫。
這一槍導致犯罪，就像男人事業強姦。
這槍是沒有必要的國防，這就是為什麼美軍只能有3萬人。
，禁止槍支的作品，這就是為什麼紐約，華盛頓，芝加哥警察需要槍對武裝犯罪分子。
婦女一樣的智能和能力的男子，但婦女的槍是“意外事故等情況發生。 ”
婦女一樣的智能和能力的男人，但gunmaker的廣告，針對婦女的“侵害他們的恐懼。 ”
這一支手槍，與多達4個開關和控制，是過於複雜，典型的成人學習和使用，而不是汽車的只有20 。
這是有益的手槍只以謀殺罪，這就是為什麼警察和軍隊確定它們作為防禦性武器。
鄰居說，攜帶槍支誰對偶爾瘋狂的偏執，因為名正言順擔心，每一個他們正在等待變成一個瘋子。
一個佔人口多數的支持槍支管制，就像一個大多數人口的用於支持擁有奴隸。
任何人都不應忽視的白痴政客誰混淆Wicca與撒旦教和誇大同性戀社會對社會的一種威脅，但聽內聖政治家誰可以指的是自動裝彈小手臂為“大規模殺傷性武器”和“攻擊核武器“ ，使用”子彈套管， “不知道之間的差別”剪輯“和”雜誌， “不能告訴之間的區別了AKM ，一個麥90 ，和SKS 。
不存在絕對權利的武器，記錄歷史，因為英國政府用來禁止天主教徒擁有槍支。這是不是一個標誌宗教偏見。（注：英國憲法實際上恢復新教徒有權擁有武器，其中天主教詹姆斯二世剝奪了他們。）
該步槍與手槍對付的攻擊性武器，就像車輛賽車條紋的跑車。
您不需要對侵略者的槍，因為政府會知道在足夠的時間問題，你需要什麼武器。
這是馬薩諸塞州的安全與禁止槍支，這就是為什麼特迪肯尼迪機槍- toting警衛。
，大多數人不能信任，所以我們應該有法律禁止槍支，其中大多數人將遵守，因為它們能夠被信任。
一名婦女被強姦，勒死她的內褲在道德上是絕對的女性吸煙槍和死的強姦犯在她的腳下。
這卡里民族，指的是紅酒和啤酒為“惡魔朗姆”和“精神”是一個明顯的瘋子，但薩拉布雷迪和Diane Whinesteen提到自動裝彈運動步槍為“軍事攻擊性武器”和“大規模殺傷性武器”是知識分子。
認為“有權保持和攜帶武器”是指徽章徽章和大衣的武器，而不是武器。（波托馬克- inc.org ）
這一槍，因此應予禁止的危險，向公眾參與，但生活報告從戰場，它可以使敵人部隊部署的通知，讓幾千名士兵死亡，也許失去了一個戰爭，是一個受保護的行為，不能損害對。
的權利明確少女色情網站的存在是不容置疑的，因為它是一個受憲法保護的延長人權法案，但聲稱，手槍是為了自衛，只是一個藉口而已，並沒有真正的保護人權法案。
這是美國公民自由聯盟是好事，因為它毫不妥協地維護某些部分的憲法，但是，全國步槍協會來說是個壞，因為它維護的其他部分的憲法。
有房子，有個郡的三倍可能有謀殺，就像一所房子與胰島素的三倍可能有糖尿病。
警方在團體備份，這就是為什麼他們需要更大容量的雜誌比平民，誰就有必須面對罪犯，因此需要較少的彈藥。
我們必須禁止銷售槍支通過在報紙分類廣告的情況下，恐怖看到的廣告，蒼蠅半個地球，購買槍支，並用它來犯下的恐怖行為，而不是使用一個數以百萬計的武器留下的“負責任的”後殖民政府的暴行。
這致電911 ，並要求他們派一名男子用槍來保護你是好的，但削減了中間人的保護自己是壞的。
人們誰自己的槍了對犯罪的恐懼是偏執的，但人誰不想讓其他人自己的槍的情況下，使它們犯下的罪行是合理的。
這一槍導致自殺率高在美國，儘管日本的利率幾乎高出三倍。
我們應該禁止郡學校附近的商店，因為所有的10歲誰購買槍支沒有父母的同意。
有一個雕像所謂“武力自由”在國會山，但是，這是不相干的意圖，我們的祖先。
我們應該禁止“週六夜特價”和其他廉價的槍，因為它是不公平的窮人獲得槍支太多。
這一槍沒有合法使用，但不喝酒，這就是為什麼我們的問題不是警察槍啤酒。
That police and soldiers are the dregs of society who were unfit to get any real job, which perfectly qualifies them with the high moral standards and keen intellects to handle these complicated tools and be our guardians.
That it's acceptable to arm a courier at $6 an hour to shoot criminals for stealing bank deposits, but unacceptable for a college-educated business owner to do it himself.
That a registration plan will reduce crime, because criminals will register their guns despite the Supreme Court decision Haynes v. US (309 US 85, 1968) that registration violates self-incrimination.
That it's reasonable to require proof of a criminal act before an order of protection can be issued, but reasonable to assume anyone with a gun will commit a criminal act, so they should be subject to prior restraint.
That teaching abstinence exclusively rather than use of condoms is doomed to fail, but encouraging absolute bans on guns rather than education in safe use is the only acceptable method of reducing crime.
That it is outrageous that civilians have rifles that were designed for the military for their own self defense, but perfectly okay to have polluting, potentially unstable, heavy vehicles that were designed for the military simply as status symbols.
That guns are the gravest threat to society because 83,000,000 gun owners didn't commit a crime yesterday.
That it is essential to incorporate locks and sensors into guns to make them safer and that only a criminal would not support this, but cops and federal agents would be exempt for safety reasons because locks are unreliable and hinder access.
That a bank guard can protect money with a gun, but you cannot protect your children with one.
That all gun dealers sell illegal weapons, just like all black people sell drugs.
That crime is higher in urban areas with less guns, and we must continue to disarm the minorities in these areas because of the risk of crime, and that isn't bigotry.
That an underpaid, overworked bodyguard should be glad to throw himself in front of a bullet for you.
That your safety is someone else's responsibility, but they have no right to tell you how to live your life.
That guns are useless against tyranny, because an armed populace of 160 million cannot defeat an army of 2 million mixed in among it. Oddly, the person claiming this has no credentials in strategic operations.
That if the above is true, we should not be terrified of the concept of that government holding control of our lives and freedom at its whim.
That the piecemeal destruction of the right to keep and bear arms makes the right useless, and therefore justifies destroying it further.
That one should be more afraid of one's spouse blowing a gasket and shooting the children, than of those children being run over by a hormone-driven teenager in a car.
"It can't happen here."
That people are too stupid to handle guns, but are intelligent enough to vote.
That guns are not an effective means of self-defense, which is why police carry them.
That one can "study" the "gun issue," but not know the difference between an assault rifle and a battle rifle.
That the NRA, with over 4 million members, is "out of touch" with America, and HCI, with 50 thousand members, is a "mandate from the people."
That a baseball bat is good protection against a burglar, provided his gun fires baseballs.
That to judge a group by secondhand news and hearsay is bigotry, unless that group is the NRA.
That the National Defense Act of 1916 doesn't exist.
That pricing products out of the reach of poor people through excessive regulation is discriminatory practice, unless that product is a gun.
That manufacturers are not responsible for damages caused by their products, unless that product is a gun.
That trigger locks and other devices make guns safer, which is why the police and military refuse to use them.
That registration of guns will help law enforcement, because that way they won't need probable cause and a warrant to conduct a search.
That registration of guns, which makes their existence a matter of public knowledge under the FOIA, isn't dangerous to owners.
That registration of guns, in violation of the McClure-Volkmer Act, and as declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court, is somehow still legal.
That the gun-toting rednecks at Saratoga and Yorktown caused the Revolution, and the British forces were intent on providing peace to North America.
That private citizens making private sales of private property is a "loophole."
That the existence of weapons not banned by previous laws is a "loophole."
That making it harder to get a license to sell firearms legally will reduce the number of people selling illegally.
That it's safer to do nothing than resist with a gun, which is why the military wins so many wars by not fighting.
That we must close shooting ranges because of the noise, but ban silencers because they are quiet.
That owning a gun for self-defense indicates an intent to kill, just like owning a first aid kit indicates an intent to impersonate a physician.
That guns are an "epidemic" even though we can't treat them with penicillin.
That there's no right to own military weapons, which is why the Civilian Marksmanship Program at http://www.odcmp.com exists to sell military weapons to civilians under Congressional authority.
That suggesting teachers be armed is an outrageous suggestion for a "civilized" society, which is why the Swiss and Israelis do it.
That making it harder and harder for even cops to have guns on school property will somehow make it harder for lunatics to kill the utterly helpless students.
That accidents with a product justify banning the product, even though MADD has never called for a ban on alcohol, people actively push to legalize drugs, and no one wants to ban swimming pools, so basically it's only practical items like guns we should ban and not the luxury items that are essential to human survival.
That a high percentage of immigrants own guns as an overreaction to the living conditions in their nations of origin, but the US should try to emulate those nations' gun control and social policies.
That the 14th Amendment requires states to accept each other's drivers licenses, even with age or vision requirement differences, marriage licenses even with age or relationship differences or if it's a gay marriage, but somehow doesn't apply to licenses to carry weapons.
That the same people who build illegal high-tech drug labs for less than $30,000 won't build illegal low-tech gun shops for less than $10,000.
That people with large gun collections are dangerous, especially if they have more than two hands to shoot with.
That autoloaders are "easily converted" to fully automatic fire, yet the person telling you this has no idea how it's accomplished.
That banning rifles with bayonet lugs will cut down on all the drive-by bayonetings.
That shooting at an intruder who smashes your door and enters with knife in hand will somehow "escalate the violence."
That it's safer with less guns, which is why lunatics shoot up schools instead of gun shows or police stations.
That guns cause crime, which is why there was no rape or murder in the Dark Ages.
That stopping the people who don't commit murder from having guns will lessen the number of those who do commit murder.
That since banning a few guns hasn't helped, we should ban more.
That just like the anti-nuclear weapons movement used to believe, if the potential victims disarm, the oppressors will take pity on them and give up their weapons in remorse.
That oppressing gun owners until they violate the law justifies oppressing them further.
That "crime guns" and old police guns should be destroyed at government expense, because the cost of exorcising the evil spirits from them before selling them to lawful owners is exorbitant.
That raising the legal age to possess firearms from 18 to 21 will REALLY show those 16 year olds.
That inner-city blacks in public housing should be disarmed to prevent crimes, but not rich white suburbanites. And it isn't a sign of racism.
That creating firearms crime by having a Byzantine code of firearm laws proves there's a problem, and justifies more laws to create more crime.
That liberal parents who give guns to problem children to "teach them responsibility" are not responsible for the deaths they cause, but everyone else's guns are.
That gun owners are a threat by existing that must be destroyed by any means possible and their rights are unimportant, but the thugs who attack us on the street whom the gun owners wish to be armed against are simply a problem we have to put up with.
That one should judge all gun owners by the acts of a few criminals, just like one should judge all blacks by the acts of a few inner-city crack dealers.
That making it harder to get firearms legally will reduce their illegal use, just like making it harder to get a prescription will cut down on the illicit drug trade.
That it's tragic when a child dies in a firearms accident, and we must pass restrictive laws to prevent it, but children poisoned by household chemicals are simply unavoidable accidents.
That you don't need a gun, therefore no one needs one, and you have the right to impose that belief and will on others.
That stupidity can be cured by legislation.
That societies with less guns have less killings by guns, just like societies with less cars have less vehicular homicide. This is deemed to be relevant.
That criminals who rob to support their drug habit can afford $65 a minute in ammunition for their automatic "Weapon of choice."
That with nationwide gun control, the entire nation can be as safe as NYC, LA and Chicago.
That since a gun isn't 100% effective for self defense, you should get rid of it, along with your first aid kit and fire extinguisher, since they aren't 100% effective, either.
That if a violent criminal enters your house, you should do nothing and wait for the police arrive, just as you'd do nothing for an injury or fire and wait for the fire truck or the ambulance.
That if Chicago were to legalize firearms, it would have shootouts in the streets, which never happens now.
That it's wrong to use tax dollars to finance private political agendas, unless that agenda is to ban guns.
That a "safe gun" will help stop criminal misuse of firearms just like "safe sex" works so well to stop rape.
That a cop with felonies on his record is safe with fully automatic weapons but a churchgoing mother with a parking ticket as her worst crime is unfit to use a pistol to protect her child.
That a suicide who used a gun would still be alive if he or she had used a knife or hanged himself or herself.
That someone else's suicide is a problem for the rest of us that would be prevented if we gave up our guns.
That alcohol is acceptable in private, as long as the user doesn't use it while driving, but mere possession of a gun is a threat to others.
That gun owners are unwilling to compromise, which is why there are only 20,000 gun laws in the US.
That criminals are better shots than civilians because of all the time they spend on the practice range.
That since criminals are better shots by the logic above, one is safer by not shooting back, but just waiting for them to run out of ammo.
That it's reasonable to assume an accident would have been lethal if the victim wasn't wearing a seatbelt, and reasonable to assume that an armed defender would have been safe even if they didn't have a gun.
That one accidental death is too many, but thousands of people dying because the means of self-defense were not available is unavoidable and not worthy of worry.
That we should ban guns because people have a "right to feel safe," but the right to feel safe by owning firearms for defense is not valid.
That it's outrageous to count 18 and 19 year-old parents as "children" for statistical purposes, but perfectly acceptable to count them as children for purposes of exaggerating gun deaths among "children."
That a zero-tolerance policy is bad regarding drugs, but a zero-tolerance policy is good regarding guns.
That martial arts are a better form of self-defense, and can defeat an armed opponent, but we still need to ban guns because of the danger they present to those few people who don't know karate.
That government officials can be trusted with automatic weapons, but private citizens cannot, because of the number of people private citizens kill while kicking in doors without search warrants.
That an 18 year old can handle a machinegun and die defending another nation's oil reserves, thereby being a hero, but an 18 year old who tries to defend his or her child with a gun belongs in jail.
That the few people who can't use martial arts or other non-lethal means of self-defense-the young, the old, the infirm, the disabled, the weak, the small, and the pregnant-are simply the necessary sacrifice we must make to criminals to avoid the risks of letting people be armed. This is not bigotry.
That the dangers of guns outweigh their recreational uses, unlike alcohol and motorcycles.
That getting rid of guns reduces violence, so the military should be armed with bouquets of flowers.
That we should hang out at funeral homes to tell the families of the deceased how lucky they are their loved one was killed by a drunk and not a man with a gun.
That a conservative with a dozen guns is an "extremist," and a liberal with a dozen guns is a "museum."
That a team of cops shooting an unarmed citizen 19 times and not getting charged with murder is "law enforcement" but an old lady shooting a knife-wielding attacker is "vigilanteism," and we should leave defense to the professionals.
That we should require trigger locks and safe storage facilities for all guns in order to prevent accidents, just like we require all household chemicals to be kept in a locked cabinet.
That a woman shooting a rapist is a felon.
That NORML is good for supporting legalization of a politically unpopular product, but the NRA is bad for supporting legalization of a politically unpopular product.
That poor people who live in high crime areas and can't afford alarms shouldn't be allowed to have guns either.
That telling a murderer he'll go to jail for carrying a gun will make him think twice.
That the only way to end gun violence is to ban guns, just like the only way to end medical malpractice is to ban doctors.
That killing a triple murderer so you don't become the fourth victim is "escalating the violence."
That we should get rid of "junk guns" so that criminals are forced to use reliable high-quality guns.
That repealing laws that discriminate against gun-owners "endorses" guns, just like repealing laws that discriminate against gays "endorses" homosexuality.
That guns are designed only to kill, just like women are designed only to give birth.
That only people over 21 are allowed to defend themselves.
That we should ban guns because their primary purpose is to kill people, but we shouldn't ban alcohol, which has its primary purpose getting intoxicated and losing control of the higher faculties, thereby increasing violence and accidental death.
That according to "Professor" Michael Bellesiles, the lack of mention of firearms in Colonial literature proves their scarcity, much like the lack of mention of outhouses proves their scarcity.
That somehow the above is more relevant to the 2nd Amendment than the lack of letters to public officials and newspapers is relevant to the 1st Amendment.
That a person who would commit violence with a gun would never do so with a knife.
That most people are seething cauldrons of potential violence who cannot be trusted with a gun, but most people are so decent that there is no need to carry a weapon for defense.
That a person foolish enough to leave a gun loaded and lying in reach of a child will somehow be responsible enough to attach a trigger lock.
That 83 million gun owners are "extremists," and the 50,000 members of the Million Moron March are "the majority."
That allowing concealed carry does not reduce crime through deterrence since some people do so even though it's illegal, but allowing concealed carry increases crime, because more people carry guns and use them irresponsibly. (Brady Bunch)
That a woman buying a gun to defend herself against a violent ex needs five days to "cool off."
That a woman being raped should refuse help from an armed stranger, and instead wait for the police.
That if the Million Moron March protesters feels threatened, they should ask police with guns to protect them while they tell everyone how worthless guns are for protection.
That a trauma surgeon's experience in treating gunshot wounds makes him an expert on gun control legislation, just like an automobile body repair technician's experience repairing cars makes him an expert on traffic laws.
That the typical town only needs one law enforcement officer per 1000 population, because most people are law abiding, but that it's dangerous to let citizens carry weapons because most people are criminal.
That the risk of arrest for carrying a weapon on school grounds will stop a person bent on suicide from starting a shootout.
That felons should be denied the right to ever own a weapon, just like rapists should be castrated before being released from jail.
That the 1939 US vs Miller case, is "established law" that endorses gun control and the matter is closed, just like Plessy vs Ferguson endorsed "separate but equal" schools and the matter is closed.
That game wardens have the most dangerous job in the world, because everyone they deal with is armed.
That there's no risk of the US becoming a police state, Japanese-Americans were not interned in the 40's, blacks were not oppressed and jailed in the 50's, and no students were killed at Kent State.
That when the government promises that they won't confiscate our weapons after we register them, we can believe them, as did the Commanche, the Sioux, the Apache, the Kaw, the Cree, the Blackfoot, the Italians in NYC, the Jews in Germany, the Zulu in South Africa…and the Americans at Lexington and Concord.
That the government can control guns as well as it controls drugs.
That the high crime rate in cities with oppressive gun control proves the need for gun control in cities without gun control and with low crime.
That Charlton Heston, as president of the NRA, must be a racist, despite his marches with Dr. King in the 1960s. After all, all gun owners are racist, and that theory isn't bigoted.
That we don't need guns because America is safe, and only criminals or people wishing to start trouble would be out late at night in bad neighborhoods.
That according to Diane Whinestein, there is no left-wing conspiracy to send police and troops to imprison American gun owners, but there is a vast, right-wing conspiracy of gun owners who must be disarmed for attempting to stop it.
That .50 caliber weapons must be banned in case Americans use them to shoot holes in the armored cars that the government doesn't own and isn't going to send against them, also according to Diane Whinestein.
That ships using Australian waters mustn't carry handguns against the mythical threat of piracy or mutiny, because some aspiring captain might sell them for a few bucks.
That gang punks shot by other gang punks are innocent victims, and babies shot by government agents deserve to die because of the unpopular beliefs of their parents.
That allowing the poor and minorities to defend themselves is Fascist.
That small arms can't win wars, as all the Viet Cong bombing, air superiority, and naval missions prove.
That John Wayne, rejected by the Marines for bad knees, who portrayed firearms as used by soldiers and law enforcement is a draft-dodging agent of evil, but antigun draft dodger Sylvester Stallone, making movies about Vietnam veterans and using weapons gratuitously, is an American hero to be slobbered over.
That violence is bad, but any defensive use of a firearm that doesn't involve the death of the perpetrator is invalid.
That the NRA is bad for running political activities, but the Million Moron March, stealing money from AIDS research, illegally maintaining tax-exempt status as a 501c(3) organization and fraudulently using a hospital rent-free as its headquarters is good for running political activities.
That Charlton Heston is evil for working for the NRA for free, but Sarah Brady charging $10,000 a speech is a paragon of altruism.
That a ranch rifle made after 1994 is somehow a military rifle.
That all firearms retailers are illegal gun dealers, just like all pharmacists are illegal drug dealers.
That hate is not a family value, but all gun owners are tobacco-chawin', beer-swillin', racist, redneck bubbas.
That a gun which sits silently in a drawer and costs pennies per round to shoot is a bad idea for self defense, but a dog that requires walks, veterinary care, and licenses, may not be allowed in certain neighborhoods and may annoy the neighbors at all hours is a good idea for self defense.
That the worst thing one can do if there's an intruder in the house is get a gun and apprehend them, and the best thing on can do is pretend to be asleep and wait for them to go away, especially if they are raping your children.
That gun control will "keep guns out of the wrong hands," meaning law-abiding Americans' hands.
That trigger locks do not interfere with the ability to use a gun for defensive purposes, which is why it makes sense that police officers are exempt from using them on their duty weapons.
That the government attempting to stop the Microsoft "monopoly" is good, and the Federal government pressuring cities to buy guns only from Smith & Wesson is also good, and not monopolistic.
That "assault weapons" have no purpose other than to kill large numbers of people, which is why the police need them.
That "assault weapons" are only designed for killing offensively, and the police need them but you do not.
That citizens don't need to carry a gun for personal protection but desk-bound police administrators who work in a building filled with cops do, as do tax auditors, vegetable inspectors, mail inspectors, and meat inspectors.
That beer-gutted police have special mental, emotional and physical capabilities that enable them to deal with the incredible complexity of a firearm, and private citizens can never hope to achieve such competence.
That the Brady Act and the "Assault Weapons" Ban which both went into effect in 1994 are responsible for the decrease in violent crime rates since 1991, and since 2004 when the AWB expired.
That 25% of the dealers at gun shows are unlicensed, and we must license these purveyors of books, tools, knives, clothing, artwork, candy and historical artifacts.
That because of New York's "tough laws" against guns, there exist black market dealers who spend thousands of dollars in gas and other expenses to drive to Arizona, which has "weak laws" in order to buy Ruger pistols at $500 each retail and drive back to New York and sell them to criminals at an "average" of $50 each, thereby making a profit. (Brady Bunch)
That there's no contradiction in the same liberals who said in the 60s that 18 year olds who could fight should be able to vote, now saying that 18 year olds can vote but shouldn't own guns.
That there are "secret lists of gun owners maintained by controversial organizations" such as the KKK and the Black Panthers, and that registration of guns will somehow prevent this. (Potomac-inc.org)
That a person with a gun that isn't registered is "armed outside the law," even though no such registration laws exist. (Potomac-inc.org)
That gun owners are all ignorant and stupid, but nevertheless belong to a huge, well-organized conspiracy that exists to destroy the nation. (Potomac-inc.org)
That the weapons that are useless for fighting crime and defending against tyranny or invasion will be the instruments of this dastardly plan. (Potomac-inc.org)
That 10 USC 310 and 10 USC 311 don't exist.
That suicides involving firearms are "gun deaths" but suicides involving knives are not "stabbing deaths."
That even though all white vans and Chevrolet Impalas are registered, they couldn't catch the DC murderers, because only gun registration will stop killings.
That "Weapons of Mass Destruction" in Iraq refers to an intact, armed nuke with a delivery system, but in the US refers to common self-loading rifles.
That an AK-47, designed in 1947 with a maximum effective range of 400 yards, was "designed to pierce police body armor" that didn't exist until the 1970s at "ranges over 1000 yards."
That there is a magic force called "kickback" that no one who works with firearms has ever heard of. It does not affect police or soldiers. "Kickback" causes a weapon to recoil, spontaneously aim itself at a loved one and automatically fire and kill them. "Kickback," while never having been observed, is a huge threat to safety and why "semiautomatic assault weapons" should never be sold to civilians.
That a good liberal opposes letting people use guns to defend themselves and their businesses because of the benefits of crime to police, insurance companies and large corporations who can afford the loss their smaller competitors can't. Only a "rightwinger" would support letting an individual engage in self-determination.
That we must ban guns with folding stocks, which have no "sporting purpose," so criminals can only get fixed stock rifles that are more accurate.
That you should wait until a severe emergency to get a gun, just as you should wait until it rains to fix the roof.
That it is acceptable to overwork interns, who will kill a few patients from fatigue-based carelessness, in order to make them better doctors and save more patients in the long run, but absolutely unacceptable for a law-abiding citizen to shoot anyone, even a rapist or murderer in the act.
That the number of accidental and suicidal deaths by drugs should not be included in statistics, but the number of accidental and suicidal deaths by guns should be.
That even despite that, when the risk of guns is lower than the risk of medical drugs, it's a "national tragedy."
That with only 1 chance in 5 of facing violent crime, and 1 chance in 10 of a gun being used defensively, the risk is minimal and gunowners are paranoid freaks, but it is insane not to get immunized against hepatitis, which strikes 1:50,000 people.
That 1:10,000 guns will be used to commit a crime, so we must get rid of them, and only 1:1000 people will have a dangerous reaction to an immunization so we must keep them.
That guns cause crime, even though crime has been shown to drop in areas with higher levels of gun ownership, and to rise where guns are restricted. This is due to "other factors." We should ignore those other factors and ban guns.
That a gun is a symbolic penis, and the person telling you this is a psychiatrist who drives a BMW.
That we should be scared of the people who own symbolic penises, but not of those who want to chop off all those symbolic penises. (thank you, L. Neil Smith)
That the Patriot Act, allowing the government to obtain library or bookstore records as ``an important tool for investigating and intercepting terrorism' even though they haven't done so is morally repugnant, but banning assault weapons that haven't been used in crime IS "An important tool for fighting crime and terrorism."
That guns in areas of the world like Afghanistan are frequently used in crime, and therefore guns are bad, just like doctors in Afghanistan have a high rate of patient loss, therefore doctors are bad.
That guns don't cause an increase in crime in low crime areas like Arlington, VA where they are available legally, but do cause an increase in crime in adjoining areas like Washington, DC where they are not available legally. The obvious solution to this is to make them illegal more places, which will make the crime rate go down to the level it is in places where they're legal.
That it's important to see that since the UK banned guns, they've had almost no crime with guns...er...well.
That some places have no guns, and no murder with guns, just like the US has no cricket bats, and no murder with cricket bats.
That ".50 caliber sniper rifles can bring down an airliner," and a .50BMG isn't very accurate.
That a single .50 caliber bullet can bring down an airliner, but the Air Force chooses to waste money on rapid fire 20mm cannon and missiles for this purpose, while the Army prefers missiles such as the Patriot.
That guns are not a good way for your neighbor to defend himself, so you should take them away from him. Or rather, have some other people with guns take them away from him, rather than risk getting hurt by his useless weapon.
That we are a peaceful society, and the way to deal with people who aren't peaceful is to send police and soldiers to peacefully persuade them with guns, and not resort to violence.
That the "gun show loophole" allows you to go to a gun show and find a federally licensed dealer surrounded by cops and federal agents and 10,000 buyers, who will wink and violate existing federal law by not requiring ID, a form 4473 and a call to NICS before selling you a gun, and neither of you will be arrested for the attempt.
That the "gun show loophole" allows you to go to a gun show and buy other things without a waiting period--like ammo, cleaning kits and books.
That the firearms industry is "unregulated." (http://www.atf.gov/firearms/faq/index.htm) (And that's just the FAQ.)
That fighting against a mugger makes one a "mercenary, fighting for money."
That the Army could save a lot of money taking the precision adjustable sights and optical sights off M16s, since they are "designed to be spray-fired from the hip." (According to Sarah Brady.)

Michael is an accomplished science fiction writer. His books include The Weapon , Confirmed Kill , Targets of Opportunity , The Hero , and The Scope of Justice .

If you enjoyed 40 Reasons to Support Gun Control , be sure to check out our entire archive of Political Humor .

政治幽默

40有理由支持槍支管制

這令人感到驚訝什麼人相信相信在槍支管制