View Single Post
  #2  
Old 04-10-2019, 6:04 PM
speedrrracer speedrrracer is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 3,355
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

I wonder if including this sort of discussion is wise:

Quote:
The old argument is that a switch blade or balisong is too dangerous to be entrusted to the public because a citizen can pull and quickly open the blade with one hand.
(snip)
Butterfly knife 1.3, 1.4. 1.2, 1.5 Average = 1.35 seconds
(emphasis mine)

Talking about speed, lethality, statistics -- all this seems like giving up territory and giving ammunition to the other side. So if balisongs were ultra-fast instead of slow on the draw should they continue to be banned? If their handles did not enclose the blade, should they continue to be banned? If they accounted for a higher percentage of murders in HI than pistols, should they continue to be banned?

Arms are supposed to be dangerous, lethal, etc. It's the whole point, and the reason why protecting the right to keep and bear them is so important. Opening the door to arbitrary measures as a reason why weapon X is OK will eventually backfire against us, because there is no limit to which arbitrary measures of safety / speed / lethality can be introduced, and it won't take long until the antis will find those arbitrary measures which favor their side, and then what?

None of this should be taken as a criticism of your great work, just having a discussion and trying to learn from the man on the front lines!
__________________
Reply With Quote