>>10
We are talking about human rights, not about what's good for society or not.
Human rights must be absolute or they have no fucking meaning.
Anything less than an absolute can be taken as flawed, meaning there is good reason to discredit it.
Restricting the "human right" to own a gun is compromising it, making it not absolute, thus, fucking meaningless.
Kinda funny how the USSR was a member of the UN for it's existence after WWII huh? Kinda how that collectivization of property that violated "human rights" wasn't under the Soviet System a violation of their constitutents human rights.
Crying "human rights" is an appeal to an authority history has proven the powerful care little about. QQ nub, you don't have a right to your guns as much as you have a right to breathe clean air, although that latter one will be written off as a "choice".
I could go on but your fucking face got fucking pwned by
>>11.