Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="soberups" data-source="post: 1197132" data-attributes="member: 14668">1. Because it is their constitutional right under the Second Amendment2. The legal definition of &quot;blind&quot; encompasses a broad range of visual impairments. Many &quot;blind&quot; people can still watch TV to a certain extent or even read large-type books using a magnifier, they just cant drive a car or walk without the aid of a cane or dog.3. Blind people have just as much of a right to self defense as sighted people, as well as an arguably greater need for some sort of equalizer against a violent criminal.4. If a 110 lb. blind woman is on her back and being assaulted by a 250 lb sighted man who is choking her out with both hands around her neck, target identification really isnt an issue at that point and she doesnt need good eyesight in order to successfully empty a .357 magnum into his chest/guts/balls.5. Blind people (at least in my state) are legally allowed to hunt, and can use the assistance of a sighted person to spot the game and aim and fire their gun for them if necessary. Blind people like to eat venison and elk meat too, and should not be denied the same opportunities as a sighted person to fill a tag. Its a lot easier to fill a tag when you own a rifle.I can think of plenty more reasons, but ultimately it boils down to whether or not blind people should be legally classified as second-class citizens. I vote &quot;no&quot;.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="soberups, post: 1197132, member: 14668"] 1. Because it is their [I]constitutional right[/I] under the Second Amendment 2. The legal definition of "blind" encompasses a broad range of visual impairments. Many "blind" people can still watch TV to a certain extent or even read large-type books using a magnifier, they just cant drive a car or walk without the aid of a cane or dog. 3. Blind people have just as much of a right to self defense as sighted people, as well as an arguably greater need for some sort of equalizer against a violent criminal. 4. If a 110 lb. blind woman is on her back and being assaulted by a 250 lb sighted man who is choking her out with both hands around her neck, target identification really isnt an issue at that point and she doesnt need good eyesight in order to successfully empty a .357 magnum into his chest/guts/balls. 5. Blind people (at least in my state) [I]are legally allowed to hunt[/I], and can use the assistance of a sighted person to spot the game and aim and fire their gun for them if necessary. Blind people like to eat venison and elk meat too, and should not be denied the same opportunities as a sighted person to fill a tag. Its a lot easier to fill a tag when you own a rifle. I can think of plenty more reasons, but ultimately it boils down to whether or not blind people should be legally classified as second-class citizens. I vote "no". [/QUOTE]

Verification