Me peaceably and responsibly owning a firearm is a good argument proving you are right that private citizens can be neither peaceable nor responsible with firearms and therefore should be denied the right to do so?   Did you think before you said that?

---Aussiegunneragain---By admitting that you are sitting in front of your computer with a loaded and cocked gun, whilst protesting about gun ownership being your right and damn the consequences for anybody else, you demonstrate to all of us that there are some folks for whom gun ownership is just too big a responsibility.---

A few things here boyo:

First and foremost: DO NOT PUT WORDS IN MY MOUTH! The 92sf was NOT COCKED. I said there were 15 rounds in the magazine and one in the pipe. However, I did NOT SAY IT WAS COCKED.

Both of these safety mechanisms are additional to the PRIMARY SAFETY feature which is my TRIGGER FINGER: it never touches the trigger of the loaded weapon unless and until I want to destroy whatever the firearm is pointing at.

Oh and I posted that last night. The 92sf is STLL LOADED and no babies, kittens, or old women have died or been butchered because it is loaded.

Furthermore, I have lived my entire LIFE with firearms and have never shot anybody nor have I ever had a negligent discharge. EVER.

 ---Aussiegunneragain---Your argument that you would like gun ownership to be like automobile registration because it would prevent people having to have background checks, just takes the cake.---

When did I make that argument? Since you have a difficulty reading simple sentences spaced generously about the page I will sum up my previous argument for you: AUTOMOBILES are LESS regulated than FIREARMS and AUTOMOBILES are involved in more fatalities in the USA than FIREARMS.

Do you understand that now?

---Aussiegunneragain---Do you want to make it even easier for criminals to get hold of a gun?---

You do realize that a criminal, BY DEFINITON, is going to BREAK THE LAW right?

That is what makes them a criminal: they break the law. That is the nature of the word. They are criminals because they engage in unlawful/criminal/illicit behavior.

They ARE criminals BECAUSE they break the law.

It stands to reason that if they will break ONE LAW, they certainly will break any other law that you may think stands in their way from obtaining a firearm especially if they want a firearm, or any weapon or tool, to complete their task at hand.

How you can possibly think that PASSING A LAW will in any way hinder people who do not FOLLOW THE LAW is beyond my comprehension.

---Aussiegunneragain---At least the majority of the people here that I disagree with argue their point out of a genuine belief that relaxed gun laws lead to a safter society.---

---Aussiegunneragain---In contrast you don't give a damn about anything but your "right" to play with your dangerous toys. Unbelievable.---

Well at least you got SOMETHING correct here! I do not give a damn about anything but MY RIGHTS because nobody is going to care about MY RIGHTS if I DO NOT CARE ABOUT MY RIGHTS.   Hell, if you had my way, I would not have MY RIGHTS so you prove my point for me!

That dangerous toy, is no more dangerous than the Honda sitting out in the car park or the multitude of drafting equipment I use to build models (whereas others use them to hijack airplanes).

Perhaps I should give them up as well