Nor is ANYONE qualified to make such a statement. Because, like I said... as soon as that is in place, guns will be manufactured up to that point. As you said, technology advances have made the assault rifles of yesteryear (shot and ball rifles) futile today. This is ground you cannot tread because it's a living, moving target.
Er. No.
Not all guns will be manufactured up to that point.
There are already limitations, they just aren't very strict. As you said, your brother's AR-15 was stripped of Full Auto fire. Manufacturer's aren't going to stop making guns that exceed these limits. They sure as hell don't make most of their money from the civilian market anyway.
Not all of them, but let's say that there is a law stating that no guns can be produced that shoot over 50 rounds a minute. Now manufacturers are going to create a gun that shoots no more than 50 rounds a minute, but maybe those rounds break apart mid flight to cause the most damage. They could also begin more research into shot filled bullets... technology will outpace some arbitrary restrictions.
I can't think of the model right now, but there's a rifle (categorized by barrel length) that can be concealed and carried because the barrel was moved back inside the gun. It looks just like a sub-machine gun, but only fires one round per trigger pull. Someone created a classification, and a manufacturer worked around it. That's what happens.
How do you intend on keeping the dirt air tight long enough to kill it? Maybe you want to trap them, put them in a glass jar and kill them that way? It's far easier, cheaper, and environmentally friendly to put a bullet in them.
Fumigation is the most common method of dealing with groundhogs. Personally I've never had to deal with them. However, numerous relatives who live further north have. Fumigation worked just fine for them.
The fumigation that you are referring to requires a ton of chemicals and could most definitely harm creatures that were not your intended targets.
Invasion ALSO doesn't happen overnight.We'd know if they Chinese were about to launch an invasion. Especially not of a superpower by the next one.
Also again, The likelihood of your scenario, while less than the last. Is still extremely slim, perhaps 3 consecutive lottery wins.
It's good to plan for disaster. However, I don't walk around with a full-body rubber suit on because I know I could be struck by lighting. There is a limit. (That's also about a million times more likely then a Chinese invasion.
Perhaps you all missed where I put in parenthesis the word "arbitrary"... biological, explosive, and nuclear weapons also do not selectively only kill military as is exemplified by the whole middle east conflict and someone flying a plane into a building. (I won't even get into the idea that there could have been someone on that plane who could have prevented that incident... because you are all trained to think of guns as "evil" and will likely find an excuse to justify your position.)
Guns, in any shape or form are not evil, bad, forsaken, or otherwise intentional weapons of destruction. They may have been designed for purposes of war, but so did Radar, X-Rays, rubber, Teflon...heck, even knifes and those purposes do not extend to items created from such technology.
Poll
Author
Topic: Where Are You On The Political Compass? (Read 41177 times)