Congresswoman Giffords, Others Shot/Killed in Arizona

[ChriswUfGator]

ROFL, this is seriously getting comical...

Simple question NotNow: Do you think it should be legal for private individuals to have personal nuclear bombs or not?

[NotNow]

You guys are laughable.  I have stated my position clearly.  I support the current laws.  The subject is actually much more complicated than either of you apparently realize.  Enjoy yourselves.  You can have a dinner party in Riverside and laugh about this thread. 

Or you might want to educate yourself on such a serious subject.

[NotNow]

You really don't understand the difference between generating some neutrons and building a nuclear weapon, do you?

[ChriswUfGator]

You guys are laughable.  I have stated my position clearly.  I support the current laws.  The subject is actually much more complicated than either of you apparently realize.  Enjoy yourselves.  You can have a dinner party in Riverside and laugh about this thread.  

Or you might want to educate yourself on such a serious subject.

Lol, was that really so hard?

So why do you support it being illegal to own a nuclear bomb? For what basic reasons do you support that?

[NotNow]

Do you believe that it is possible for a private individual to build or buy a nuclear weapon?

[NotNow]

The current laws make it illegal to possess fissile material.  I thought that you would realize that by now.  Are you a working lawyer?  What is your area of expertise? 

[ChriswUfGator]

Do you believe that it is possible for a private individual to build or buy a nuclear weapon?

Build one, yes. It's absolutely possible.

Buy an already complete working weapon? Debatable, but probably not at the moment. That can easily change.

[NotNow]

And you are basing this judgment on what?  A movie?  Do either of you have any kind of experience or training in nuclear physics or nuclear weapons?

Are you a working lawyer?  Do you specialize?  (That's for Chris, I'm familiar with StephenDare!'s legal background.) 

[NotNow]

As I have made clear to both of you, only parts of nuclear weapons are illegal to possess.  Simple possession of fissle material is dangerous without proper training in handling and storage.  Even in nature, fission in naturally occuring urainium has occurred, but you know that, don't you?

[NotNow]

I'm waiting for both of you to define "military grade" weapons and "assault weapons".  You said it, define it.

[ChriswUfGator]

Lol, maybe you want to explain how one could have a functional nuclear weapon without fissile material?

You're really stretching here, NotNow. You've already stated you agree that nuclear bombs should be illegal for private use, what's your reasoning behind that? Is it the potential harm to others, perhaps?

[NotNow]

I stated that I support the current laws.  Fissile material is inherently dangerous.  You are aware of the dangers of it, aren't you?  You just can't or won't answer my questions though, will you?

Define "military grade" weapons and "assault weapons".  These are your terms.  Tell us what you think is too dangerous for an American citizen to own.  

Are you a working lawyer?  Still looking?  

StephenDare!?  Have you something to say on this?  

[NotNow]

I stated that I support the current laws.  Fissile material is inherently dangerous.  You are aware of the dangers of it, aren't you?  You just can't or won't answer my questions though, will you?

Define "military grade" weapons and "assault weapons".  These are your terms.  Tell us what you think is too dangerous for an American citizen to own. 

Are you a working lawyer?  Still looking? 

StephenDare!?  Have you something to say on this?   

Im not sure I have an opinion.  I support laws illegalizing wmds for citizens.

I am interested in why you also support them.

Are you at liberty to explain your reasons?

So you have no problem with semi auto pistols and rifles or high capacity magazines.  And no opinion on private ownership of fully automatic weapons, or crew served weapons.  Good.  Thanks.

[ChriswUfGator]

Count me in for lunch, I'm not huge on justifying my personal life on message boards, but will happily debate anything in person. I have never asked NotNow what his duty assignment is or what agency or department within the agency he works for. I know he's a cop, but I'd never make it any more personal than that, because it's not relevant. NotNow just asks these questions in order to imply that whoever disagrees with him is unqualified or unentitled to an opinion, which is silly and distracts from the real issue. I normally take the bait, though it never turns out well for him. You have to wonder why he always wants another bite at this apple when all his previous bites have ended disastrously. But I have avoided taking this bait tonight and will continue avoiding it, as it is nothing more than a distraction strategy. If NotNow is that interested in my personal life, he'd ask at some other time besides the middle of a contentious debate.

So back to the point, NotNow: You've stated you agree that nuclear bombs should be illegal for individuals, is that because of the potential for mass harm to others?

[ChriswUfGator]

Firearms are often elegant Stephen, even though it's just a little .22 plinker you ought to check out a Mark III sometime, it's a truly elegant design for a handgun, based on a Luger. Ditto with a P220 .45, just an elegant object to hold. Rifles and antique firearms are often exceptionally beautiful, with hand carved stocks and finely detailed inlays. Honestly there is big component of art to it.

My position on all of this is simple, I also think it should remain legal to own firearms, and would never suggest otherwise. But I am conflicted on the assault weapons issue. These mass killings always seem to involve them, and I know of no legitimate need for private ownership outside of "just because I can."