Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleeding Head Ken  What would the qualification for a citizen be to own a nuclear weapon? Other than that, whether it's a bad idea or not, every individual has the right to keep and bear arms. Training is a great idea, but legislating training or other qualifications is infringement. |
I'm just spitting out ideas. Obviously any legislation requiring training or qualifications can be abused.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleeding Head Ken I didn't say "can cause", I said "will always cause." Nuclear weapons, biological agents, even certain types of poisonous gas will always cause widespread damage and there is absolutely no way to ensure that innocent life will not be destroy.
Most explosives can be shaped and targeted. Ultimately, of course, you are responsible for any undue or excessive destruction or loss of life that you cause. |
Most weapons can and do cause collateral damage. If you use full-metal-jackets then the bullet probably isn't going to stop when it hits a person. In a crowded area it could and WILL injure or kill many people. By your same logic a machine gun causes "undue or excessive destruction or loss of life." Different weapons have different areas of effect.
If someone uses a tactical nuclear device or a small amount of nerve gas there may be no collateral damage. These weapons do not always ensure loss of innocent life if used carefully.
Perhaps personal weapons should only be capable of targeting a single target at a time?