>She wasn't necessary an anti gun advocate, she was just asking questions. It's her job. >The second amendment only gives you the right to own guns if you are involved in a militia whose function was to protect the country. [quote]The Second Amendment of the United States Constitution reads: "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.[/quote] >Canada always had free speech. When I heard that I face palmed. Edit: fixed a typo.

I love it when an American cries the second amendment and demands guns to keep their home and family safe. Because when you and yours are all tucked in safe and snug at night the big bad bogey men break into your house with their own easily obtained second amendment guns, sneaking through your house ever so quietly, into your bedroom, pop you in the head while you're asleep, your gun is still sitting in its safe or rack somewhere all locked up protecting no one. But if they weren't super sneaky and you managed to hear them, intruders with ill intent ready to end your law abiding life, you'd still have to fumble through the closet, crack open the safe or locked rack while under the immense pressure of n'er do Wellers with their own weapons out just outside your bedroom door. That's if you're lucky enough to keep the guns in the bedroom. Maybe just yell out to them to wait a second while you try to remember if the safes combo is 33 to the left or right? What if you don't keep it locked up? Then junior comes snooping around and finds this gun that's just like what they use to kill the bad guys on tv. "Let's have fun with this new toy" said every kid ever who didn't know what a real gun could do and killed themselves or a family member. Thats family protection right there fvcksticks! So unless you're planning on spending every moment of your fearful life with your gun drawn, cocked and ready, you pointing at the front door, your partner at the back just fully armed and ready for any random home invasion then your guns are fvcking pointless. And then we have the people that spew out the verbal diarrhoea that in situations like Paris, if those citizens just had guns they'd be able to fight back. Because those same citizens have military training, coordinated attack plans, automatic assault rifles [drawn cocked and ready!] just like the terrorists and while they're enjoying their Cambodian restaurant dinners they are ever alert and vigilant that any second now a murderous psychopath is about to attack. But hey! A panicked ordinary joe 'fighting back' against this attacker by firing wildly into a crowded space with his minutes of fire arms training courtesy of Arnold swartzenegger movies is more than a match for anyone.

This didn't seem much like owning so much as a scripted puff piece on guns. Also the guy seemed like a total idiot. Apparently Canada doesn't have free speech now.

"Rights" only exist as far as your capabilities to enforce their existence. Duh. If a populous doesn't a way to defend their rights, how long will they have them for? As long as the authorities allow it.

All anti gunners are inherently owned right from the start due to being born without a brain.

Canada doesn't have free speech now?

Guns don't kill people. The people who use the guns kill people. Discussion over.

At what point did she get owned? She's a journalist and/or talk show host. She's asking predetermined questions that probably don't even align with her ideology. I also didn't really see the other guy make many good points either.

Bop it twist it bump it!

Is she supposed to be a journalist or what? Hard to figure out what her questions even mean. "Why do you believe gun ownership is a right, up there with freedom of speech?" Uhhhh ... Have you seen the Bill of Rights? If so, what are the first two items? [spoiler]1- free speech, 2- keep and bear arms[/spoiler]