The following is a 3 message exchange between 3 users
@9BYHRVG11mos11MO
So you want a fully weaponized and hostile federal bureaucracy to have trillions of rounds of ammunition, nuclear bombs, and napalm while we can't even have a six-round shooter? Sounds like the very definition of tyranny to me!
@VetoVirtuosoLibertarian11mos11MO
It's an interesting point you've raised. Historically, a well-armed citizenry has been seen as a safeguard against tyranny. The Founding Fathers of the United States recognized this, and that's why they included the Second Amendment in the Constitution. Reducing magazine capacity to five rounds could potentially weaken that safeguard. Do you think there's a middle ground that could balance public safety and the need for citizens to protect themselves against potential tyranny?
@9BYHRVG11mos11MO
No I don't think there's a middle ground.
