Batman wrote:Define 'extremely negatively effect' please. From what I can tell at it does is 'make them switch magazines more often' which is a nonissue in range situations and usually in self-defense situations.
It also makes them possibly be criminal by possessing property, have to possibly turn in their property without compensation, and tells people they cannot be trusted with an object because of the actions of others. The problem is not the fact people need to reload more in self defense or range situations because thats pretty much a non-issue I'd think.
There's very little harm done by fake tits or bigass TVs. Sure, you can definitely kill a person with a bigass TV (and I can probably find a way to kill one with fake tits too) but the fact is unlike guns, they're not designed to kill people, and their regular use has a very low probability of getting people killed, so they're not really comparable.
Depends who you ask on whether or not bigass TVs and fake tits are harmful. TVs are said by some to warp peoples mind turning sweet little children into psychos and perverts, cause sedentary life styles, cause financial ruin by having to buy the biggest baddest tele they cannot afford, and probably cause eye strain and that doesn't even get into the environmental impacts that producing those television do. Fake breasts are said by some to negatively effect the sexuality of people by giving a unrealistic expectation of a woman's body. Most woman getting big fake tits are probably getting them to sell their bodies as strippers, porn stars, or even prostitutes. Not harmless.
And just because something is designed to kill doesn't mean it will automatically cause harm or is dangerous or even needs banned. Swords are designed to kill. They suck at cutting wood, probably can't play baseball with them, and I doubt a chef could find a use for them. But they are not banned, not even really regulated in most places. Crossbows are designed to kill. Everything a gun does it does and does it far quieter. The ammo can be reused. You can even find repeating "assault" crossbows. They were considered so dangerous a Pope wanted to completely ban their usage. Despite in some areas they being considered the same as firearms they is very little regulation of them in the US and elsewhere.
But the thing to remember is a sword, a crossbow, or even a gun is only dangerous when someone uses it in a dangerous way. Most law abiding gun owners are just that, law abiding. Never going to use their weapons to harm anything except maybe Bambi.
Sports cars are no more dangerous than regular cars and guess what, you need a driver's license to operate those either way. Guns? 2ND AMENDMENT! YOU CAN'T WITHHOLD MY GUNS JUST BECAUSE I'M TOO STUPID TO TIE MY OWN SHOELACES!
Sports cars are said to be more dangerous especially in wintry conditions. They are especially more dangerous in the hands of some misusing them thanks to their engine power and aerodynamic bodies that make them move like a bullet. But generally a sports car is no more dangerous then a regular.......except when used improperly. Just the same as an assault weapon vs a hunting rifle.
And atleast in the US you don't need a license to own and operate a car. You can't buy a car without one just fine though might have some trouble getting it off the lot unless you brought someone that does have a license. You can drive a car without a license on private property but need one to drive on public roads.
http://peopleof.oureverydaylife.com/can ... -3822.html