RE: Thinking about the 2nd Amendment and Nuclear Weapons.

You are viewing a single comment's thread:

We are pretty much on the same page here.

I'm not going to wait around either to be mauled by a dog wanting to steal my life and "property" (that stuff we have that we work so hard to attain) even if they take away our guns, we resort to using sticks, stones, arrows, swords, knives, teeth, etc. They are tools. It is how we use them. Should everyone have them?

No.

Not everyone is sane enough to be responsible with weapons, but they will have them and others should too for protection just in case.

I have pondered this many times throughout my life. And I still find it very obtuse and idiotic to force people to give up their weapons. It's asking for trouble big time.

But here we are, discussing who should, and who shouldn't be able to own weapons.

A nuke, or something more powerful, can be used to steer off incoming spatial threats like an asteroid for example. So then why eliminate the use of these superweapons?

We don't know the threats waiting for us out there. Humanity is still young. If we are really considering to explore the outside universe apart from our own, humanity will have to increase their consciousness and spiritual aspects or else they might bring their inner wars with them wherever we go.

How did I end up talking about space?...

Anyways, I don't own weapons except for my brain. It has helped me out of all the situations that could have caused me real harm. Does that mean I won't use violence if necessary? Is a weapon always necessary?

No to the former and not always to the latter.

Hmm... That's all I have to say about that for now...



0
0
0.000
0 comments