Let's face it, justified or not when it comes to killing, firearms don't get the best PR. But now we have a situation where a firearm (a super evil looking one at that) dealt sweet justice to a man that killed thousands of people without firearms.
I support firearm ownership. They're just expensive and you must maintain them, so I'll never probably buy one.
I do not think anybody was arguing that the military shouldn't have fire arms.:grin: I support the army having guns. I do not support some random guy having guns. But if you now appreciate fire arms, are you saying that guns killed Bin Laden? I thought guns didn't kill people?
Yes, obviously we must support the 2nd Amendment now because otherwise combat personnel would not have access to firearms.
Do you know for a fact that none of the guns jammed? This operation wouldn't have been able to be carried out without helicopters.
You don't have to be military to have the right to bears arms. Why don't you read our U.S. Constitution?!
Why are you crapping in my thread? I know for a fact no weapon malfunctioned to the point of being abandoned and endangering the lives of several operators.
