Nope, because I don’t have an over inflated ego like you do. :) Alright, you’re right, they couldn’t have weapons legally. Neither could military leaders, political leaders, or anyone else. Most gun control debates are about getting it out of the hands of individuals but allowing the state to continue having it. Because it recognizes the state being armed and the civilian not was serious miss match of power. I don’t hear anything from gun control advocates about disarming all federal and military forces inside the borders of the united states. As well this only included cities and other religiously restricted areas, it didn’t ban them EVERYWHERE. So weapons in rural areas where they’d have to fend off wild life for protecting their crops or animals were still a thing. Not exactly a good anti-gun argument.
Now you’re just making up your own arguments to better suit the mindset you’ve already decided on, how well exactly did that work for you last time you did that? You could look at gun violence statistics for the US and other developed countries. You could look at the change in gun violence that happened in countries when they banned guns. You could do so much to learn yet you insist on creating your own fantasies as to why the world must be the way you perceive it should be. Straight up the mental gymnastics meme. What lie will you tell yourself next so not to go through the mental anguish of having believed a falsehood.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pomerium
“Weapons were prohibited inside the pomerium.”
Must be real embarrassing being you right now
Nope, because I don’t have an over inflated ego like you do. :) Alright, you’re right, they couldn’t have weapons legally. Neither could military leaders, political leaders, or anyone else. Most gun control debates are about getting it out of the hands of individuals but allowing the state to continue having it. Because it recognizes the state being armed and the civilian not was serious miss match of power. I don’t hear anything from gun control advocates about disarming all federal and military forces inside the borders of the united states. As well this only included cities and other religiously restricted areas, it didn’t ban them EVERYWHERE. So weapons in rural areas where they’d have to fend off wild life for protecting their crops or animals were still a thing. Not exactly a good anti-gun argument.
Now you’re just making up your own arguments to better suit the mindset you’ve already decided on, how well exactly did that work for you last time you did that? You could look at gun violence statistics for the US and other developed countries. You could look at the change in gun violence that happened in countries when they banned guns. You could do so much to learn yet you insist on creating your own fantasies as to why the world must be the way you perceive it should be. Straight up the mental gymnastics meme. What lie will you tell yourself next so not to go through the mental anguish of having believed a falsehood.