According to the following article: “the United States has still not destroyed all of its massive supply of deadly nerve agents.” And “The United States still has more than 3,000 tons of chemical weapons.”FYI, the US biological weapons program was cancelled in 1969 by Nixon, and the destruction of the stockpiles was finished by 1973
For Chemical weapons, that program ended in 1997, with final destruction of the stockpiles completed in 2012
cdc.gov/nceh/demil/history.htm
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_biological_weapons_program#End_of_the_program_.281969-73.29
Having a sophisticated and armed military is prudent. There is absolutely no reason that civilians need weapons of war in a peaceful environment. You are relying on fear mongering propaganda which is invested in turning profits.Weapons have been a part of human existence from the beginning. The fallen nature of man requires it. Evil men will attack and conquer those who are unarmed.
foxnews.com/opinion/2015/07/08/theres-no-debate-about-guns-im-alive-and-so-is-my-husband-because-had-one-in-my-purse.htmlHaving a sophisticated and armed military is prudent. There is absolutely no reason that civilians need weapons of war in a peaceful environment. You are relying on fear mongering propaganda which is invested in turning profits.
Have you ever traveled outside the US to countries that ban civilian war weapons?foxnews.com/opinion/2015/07/08/theres-no-debate-about-guns-im-alive-and-so-is-my-husband-because-had-one-in-my-purse.html
Being armed is prudent, period. There is no such thing as a “peaceful environment”.
What do you consider weapons of war? Chemical weapons? Nuclear weapons? Or anything that shoots?Having a sophisticated and armed military is prudent. There is absolutely no reason that civilians need weapons of war in a peaceful environment. You are relying on fear mongering propaganda which is invested in turning profits.
I mentioned previously in this thread that I had my pocketknife confiscated in England. Is that a “civilian war weapon”? Most of Catholic America has very strict gun control but very high rates of crime. I am certainly very nervous when I travel there.Have you ever traveled outside the US to countries that ban civilian war weapons?
Self-loading rimfire rifles, pump action and self loading shotguns, self loading centrefire rifles, machine guns, full automatic self loading rifles and handguns. Those designed for war conditions.What do you consider weapons of war? Chemical weapons? Nuclear weapons? Or anything that shoots?
So were bows and arrows, clubs, and pointy sticks. Good luck riding your world of those.Self-loading rimfire rifles, pump action and self loading shotguns, self loading centrefire rifles, machine guns, full automatic self loading rifles and handguns. Those designed for war conditions.
Certain types of knife are a favourite of criminals in pursuit of violence and crime. How would the police know you had a pocket knife on you unless you were wielding it in public?I mentioned previously in this thread that I had my pocketknife confiscated in England. Is that a “civilian war weapon”? Most of Catholic America has very strict gun control but very high rates of crime. I am certainly very nervous when I travel there.
Certain types of clothes, cars, music, even colors are a favourite of criminals, as well.Certain types of knife are a favourite of criminals in pursuit of violence and crime. How would the police know you had a pocket knife on you unless you were wielding it in public?
I guess they are just innocent victims of the greedy Yankee arms manufacturers. Otherwise they would be peaceful and loving toward one another because they are not smart enough to have their arms industries.80% of the guns in South America come from the US. That’s a whacking profit to US gun manufacturers. How is it possible that that many weapons are bought and moved across the border unless there’s some blind eyes being turned?
Are you making the argument that nothing should be banned if people want to have it? But if you do in fact agree that some things need to be banned… by what measure do you judge that?Certain types of clothes, cars, music, even colors are a favourite of criminals, as well.
I’m making the argument that banning things based on what criminials prefer or use is insane.Are you making the argument that nothing should be banned if people want to have it? But if you do in fact agree that some things need to be banned… by what measure do you judge that?
The reason criminals prefer certain items is because they make crime and violence expedient. For example a flick blade is easy to conceal until the moment of use. It’s also safe to transport away from the crime quickly without having to ditch it or risk self injury. It was originally designed with weaponry purposes in the mid 18th century and has featured heavily in local gang warfare in different countries.I’m making the argument that banning things based on what criminials prefer or use is insane.
A car makes robbing a bank expedient.The reason criminals prefer certain items is because they make crime and violence expedient. For example a flick blade is easy to conceal until the moment of use. It’s also safe to transport away from the crime quickly without having to ditch it or risk self injury. It was originally designed with weaponry purposes in the mid 18th century and has featured heavily in local gang warfare in different countries.
It’s a weapon, not a dinner utensil. That’s why criminals prefer it over a butter knife and that’s why it is a banned product in much of the world.
You’re going off on one of your flights of fancy again. The correlation between certain weapons and increased crime and death is a no brainer. In the interests of public safety and the common good, there’s every good reason to ban a thing. In the US, the major problem you have with stemming gun related violence is the gun is regarded as an inalienable and *divine *right with little conditions. That’s a misinterpretation of the constitution and Church teaching, that requires turning a blind eye to the fatal consequences of a weapon rich environment.A car makes robbing a bank expedient.
I realize that some people may choose to shut off their brains when the subject of weapons comes up but I’m just trying to follow your “argument” that things that criminals prefer, or which make crime expedient, or which were originally designed for war, need to be banned. If you have a better criteria in mind, let’s hear it.You’re going off on one of your flights of fancy again. The correlation between certain weapons and increased crime and death is a no brainer. In the interests of public safety and the common good, there’s every good reason to ban a thing. In the US, the major problem you have with stemming gun related violence is the gun is regarded as an inalienable and *divine *right with little conditions. That’s a misinterpretation of the constitution and Church teaching, that requires turning a blind eye to the fatal consequences of a weapon rich environment.