Because our second amendment rights are the only thing that protects our first amendment rights.

If no one is getting hurt why shouldn't I be able to do so? Just to appease scared lefties? lol

I honestly think the shooting at Sandy Hook is what will have been the moment where adults in this country no longer be shaken or waver in their support for standing up for their rights/freedoms given by the constitution.

You'll understand when you get to God's country close to the border....

Not really, if you want your representatives to actually represent you as opposed to doing whatever they wish then you gotta make them legitimately uneasy about stepping out of line. Furthermore if we get everyone on board with open carry being a normal thing people will really understand how there is no danger in people simply carrying guns around.

After all the more something happens the more people get used to it being a part of every day life. Sorta like handgun related crimes, it happens far more than assault weapons and thus nobody actually wants to ban them. Is it terrible? Sure, but at least it means that Americans are secure in their second amendment rights when it comes to handguns at the very least.

This is excellent! We need to take further steps and make it so everyone can openly carry whatever guns they like anywhere. Only then will our public officials truly understand the potential consequences of voting against their constituency.

Religion keeps you thinking about what God would want rather than just yourself. In essence this makes religious people more trustworthy when it comes to doing the right thing where as atheists largely tend to be more sneaky and only consider doing what is right for them.

Whether that makes religious people more likely to be moral comes down to how one defines morality I suppose, but I'll stick with groups who tend to be more trustworthy.

Because 9 does not equal 15.

Because accidents happen.

Because the trainer should have known better than to hand the kid an uzi.

Because the trainer should not have been standing above the kid.

And because it does not negate the potential life threatening situations that could be mitigated if a young adult did posses a firearm.

You don't blame a child who had to fend for their lives naturally.

@purplelabel:

Like several others in this thread you have nothing to say but "troll" which I suspect is due to the fact you find it hard to comprehend that others have differing opinions. If you can't handle a variety of opinions I suggest not posting.