My chances are better with a truck plowing through than bullets spraying.Quote:
Originally Posted by smoothy
|
My chances are better with a truck plowing through than bullets spraying.Quote:
Originally Posted by smoothy
Yes it is very clear that part of the Constitution is forgotten, the Constitution didn't call for an ill trained and ill disciplined rabble rampaging through the land. It seems to me that if guns owners are not formed into a well regulated militia then what they do is outside their Constitutional rights. People love to isolate certain words and forget others but what is said must be taken as a whole.Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
Now what purpose would a well regulated militia have? External defense, certainly, but also the keeping of order since in the founders view a police force did not exist, therefore this militia should exist to facilitate public order and any person who possesses a weapon for other purposes is outside the Constitution. But I know logic doesn't prevail
We have a right to bear arms in our constitution Clete, but no where is there a right to SELL arms and while sellers are already heavily regulated, there is a wide latitude what they sell, and to whom they sell it to, and no laws apply to private sellers at gun shows of which are numerous, at least none that can be enforced.
Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
There is a COLLECTIVE right to bear arms - i.e., as part of a militia. There is no INDIVIDUAL right to bear arms - i.e., outside of a militia. That is what the amendment's language reads. The language is very clear.
However, in the late 18th century, hunting was a common and necessary activity. Militia membership was not a requirement to hunt.
The hallowed founders screwed that one up big time. So that 200+ years later, there is still no consensus on what the amendment means.
Bovine excrement, where exactly does it say that anyplace. So apparently there is no individual freedom of speech or any other individual freedoms either by that same perverted extreme left wing perspective of the Bill of rights.Quote:
Originally Posted by Athos
This IS the second amendment of the Constitution of the US:
https://usconstitution.net/consttop_2nd.htmlQuote:
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
You can interpret the Constitution any way you want but states make their own rules within this framework. Maybe someday the state of Virginia will come for Smoothys arsenal and shoot his a$$ for resisting, but until then we can still apply some common sense restrictions for the public safety can't we?Quote:
The trick is finding that balance between freedom and reasonable regulation, between unreasonable unfettered ownership and unreasonable prior restraint. Gun ownership is indeed a right — but it is also a grand responsibility. With responsibility comes the interests of society to ensure that guns are used safely and are used by those with proper training and licensing. If we can agree on this simple premise, it should not be too difficult to work out the details and find a proper compromise.
Like a database for all 50 states of gun applicants for background checks. One of the things that came out of Vegas was the shooter was taking meds.
Las Vegas shooter had a diazepam prescription ? here's what that means - Business Insider
And he was a drinker when he wasn't gambling. Not saying meds and alcohol is the only factor here, but clearly we need to look at mental and emotional health of ANYONE we give the responsibility of gun ownership to. Common sense? It's a standard that law enforcement and the military applies to applicants.
Oh the lefties WANT a 50 state registry so they know who has exactly WHAT so they can come after everyone's guns when they decide to overthrow the government when they can't steal any more elections.
We already have more "common sense" laws than we need... and consider what side is harping the loudest.. the ones who think every Muslim that wants to come here should be allowed in.. without any waiting in line or applications everyone else has to do... yet want to take away the rights of actual Americans on some false promise of "security".
Chicago, and to lesser degrees NYC, and Baltimore (and the state of MD)... all have repressive gun laws... from unconstitutionally Draconian to ones that just make no sense (like MD where almost the only people carrying a gun you will meet is either a cop or criminal)... if you are in a restaurant in any of those and some thug comes in gunning up the place... you aren't going to have any law abiding people with a CC permit that can do something... so you wait 20 minutes for the cops to show up and blame everyone but the people responsible for that situation... like liberals do. All three of those places are among the HIGHEST crime rates in the country. And the left sees no correlation there.
Crime statistics are drastically different from one side of the Potomac river to the other... in VA we have open carry, and it's a SHALL issue state... a criminal never knows who will shoot back.. and our crime rates are significantly lower than across the river in MD where they can be assured... if there is no cop around... nobody can stop them. Exact same thing holds true for the border between DC and VA...(the same river)
I thought Obama got all the guns already.
Oh its clear he WANTED to... and if he had any clue who had exactly what and where, he would have tried. He also had the common sense to know that would have ended very badly for him and anyone who would have been his flunky running house to house trying.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
After all Chicago is such a shining beacon of safe neighborhoods and friendly neighbors because of decades of Democrat control. Hell its a virtual Utiopia, or did I get it backwards using "it's" in place of "is"
Funny thing is..as much as Owebummer hated guns in the hands of the public......he ended up being the greatest gun salesman in recent times.
Obama had NO interest in taking away guns owned by sane, legitimate gun owners.
Oh the lefties WANT a 50 state registry so they know who has exactly WHAT so they can come after everyone's guns when they decide to overthrow the government when they can't steal any more elections.
Right wing paranoia fueled lunacy! Hardly common sense since we probably have as many guns as you do!
We already have more "common sense" laws than we need... and consider what side is harping the loudest.. the ones who think every Muslim that wants to come here should be allowed in.. Without any waiting in line or applications everyone else has to do... yet want to take away the rights of actual Americans on some false promise of "security".
The average wait time under Obama was two years! Again common sense has to be based on facts and not just paranoia!
Chicago, and to lesser degrees NYC, and Baltimore (and the state of MD)... all have repressive gun laws... from unconstitutionally Draconian to ones that just make no sense (like MD where almost the only people carrying a gun you will meet is either a cop or criminal)... if you are in a restaurant in any of those and some thug comes in gunning up the place... you aren't going to have any law abiding people with a CC permit that can do something... so you wait 20 minutes for the cops to show up and blame everyone but the people responsible for that situation... like liberals do. All three of those places are among the HIGHEST crime rates in the country. And the left sees no correlation there.
And of course you have FACTS and not just speculation to go along with your absurd narrow claim. Fact is a lunatic can walk in a church, restaurant, mall, or beauty shop ANYWHERE in America and smoke a bunch of people including the state of Texas where I am and CC is a matter of fact as is open carry, and matters little what the crime rate is
Crime statistics are drastically different from one side of the Potomac river to the other... in VA we have open carry, and it's a SHALL issue state... a criminal never knows who will shoot back.. and our crime rates are significantly lower than across the river in MD where they can be assured... if there is no cop around... nobody can stop them. Same thing holds true for the border between DC and VA... (the same river)
Densely populated areas (URBAN) have higher crimes than less dense areas (RURAL) so what's your point? Nothing that makes common sense I suspect since you broad brush everything into neat little nonsense categories. Let take your example of Chicago for instance that has areas of blight, high unemployment, and no economic development, with very high rates of violence and crimes, and entirely crime free areas where the money flows like a river. This is a direct result of generations, and DECADES (More than a century in the case of Chicago specifically) of public policy design to keep power in the hands of a few brokers and oppress the majority of others.
Look up the history of Chicago and get the FACTS, and then look up any city and get the facts instead of making up nonsense to fit your own LUNACY!
The Second Amendment clearly identifies right as belonging to ‘the people.’ It is sheer nonsense to argue that the intent of the framers was to give the power to state run militias only . They all mistrusted government and thought that the preservation of liberty rested in the people being properly armed. No where else in the constitution does the use of the words 'the people ' mean a state controlled subset . The people are individuals when rights are mentioned .
George MasonQuote:
I ask, Sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people. To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them."
Co-author of the Second Amendment
during Virginia's Convention to Ratify the Constitution, 1788
George Washington .Quote:
Firearms stand next in importance to the constitution itself. They are the American people's liberty teeth and keystone under independence
Will my rights as a citizen be protected when "the people" are armed as they are now? Will "the people" gather into a cohesive body, guns at the ready?Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
The right to bear arms has never been an issue with me, but given the advancement in technology, can't we at least DEMAND responsibility, and SAFETY to go along with ACCOUNTABILITY?
That's asking too much?
Apparently it is Tal, you are abridging an absolute right of the people apparentlyQuote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
Sorry Tal and Clete and WG . None of your controls would've prevented Las Vegas . Stephen Paddock passed all the background checks when he purchased weapons. You know and I know that what the left wants in this country is a repeal of the 2nd amendment and enact laws that mimic Australia's restrictions and confiscations .All of the “common sense” laws for which liberals advocate are designed to hinder legal firearms purchases, not criminal gun violence.
Sometimes I think you want to force a reply. There are no confiscations here, Tom, unless illegal activity forces a search, there have been amnesties where citizens voluntarily hand in unregistered weapons. Our laws were put in place to counter gun violence of the very type that manifested itself in LV, and they have been successful, much to the chagrin of the US gun lobby. What we have demonstrated is a democracy can exist and be refreshed at the ballot box without the citizens resorting to violence or assassinating the leadersQuote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
Huh? I didn't suggest a control. I wondered if the gun-carrying rabble will protect me when the government comes along to strip me of my rights. (P.S. They're already planning to strip me of SS and Medicare and my elderly mother of Medicaid.)Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
WG
knowing that ;why would you accept a social contract where the only way to protect your rights is from the same government that would strip you of what you are entitled to ? The gun toting "rabble " you speak of is the government that can ,will and has imposed it's will on the people by the force of arms many times .
The facts are clear . There are over 300 million guns in the country and record numbers of Americans applying for gun permits .Do you really believe those gun owners are a 'gun-carrying rabble ' ? The only noticeable achievement of all these so called "common sense " measures is the increase in sales of guns. Despite the sensationalization of well publicized mass shootings ;the truth is that there is more than a 20 year decline in gun violence in the country .(even as places with strict gun laws like Chi -town are the wild wild west some weekends ). 2/3 of the gun violence in the country is self inflicted suicide or accident .
The gun-toting rabble are all the NRA members (those open- and concealed-carry dudes). Will they connect with each other to form a militia and protect me against the government's tanks and cannons?Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
Care to expand on that.Quote:
The gun toting "rabble " you speak of is the government that can ,will and has imposed it's will on the people by the force of arms many times .
Do you think he needs too? Too many examples of cops, etc breaking up peaceful demonstrationsQuote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
GotchaQuote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
Local or state COPS policing demonstrations is not the same as the government knocking on doors for the purpose confiscating the legal guns of law abiding citizens like the right wing is afraid of.
you think those are the only instances where the government imposed it's will by force on the people ? Let me ask you something ; why does the IRS have an arsenal that many 3rd world nations would envy. What we really need is back round checks of the IRS employees . The number of non-military federal officers with firearm authority (200,000+) now exceeds the number of U.S. Marines (182,000)....and that does not include TSA , FBI , and Homeland Security . Spending on guns, ammo and military-style equipment at 67 federal agencies;including 53 regulatory, administrative agencies amounted to $1.48 billion between 2006-2014.The IRS stockpile alone includes pump action and semi-automatic shotguns ; and semi-automatic AR-15 rifles (S&W M&P 15) and military style H&K 416 rifles.Health and Human Services (HHS) has it's own arsenal and has their own “National Training Operations Center” .The FDA, Small Business Administration (SBA), Smithsonian Institution, Social Security Administration, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, United States Mint, Department of Education, Bureau of Engraving and Printing, National Institute of Standards and Technology all have been armed .
So everybody and his mama in America has a gun. Are government workers Americans covered under the second amendment? Okay show me where they have imposed their will by gunpoint.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
Government, by definition, ALWAYS imposes its will on the people by force or threat of force. It's the nature of the beast.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
Sounds like a bad case of paranoia, is someone afraid guns will suddenly disappear?
Seems LOGICAL that if all the loonies, criminals, and every other citizen had a gun, then maybe government should have them too, you know for protection against overthrow. LOL, we sell things that go boom all over the WORLD! Even to Aussies at a discount, and can make more on demand!
They will NEVER EVER disappear!
Yes you sell us some weapons, but our military don't use your guns, they prefer a weapon with more killing powerQuote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
We got those too at a discount for allies.
Despite the rhetoric we are not signed on to making america great, but you could give us a discount on the flying brickQuote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
Smoothy while it may be true that repressive regimes may remove guns from the individual not all regimes that control firearms are repressive, this sort of thing is the rubbish thinking that is associated with the firearms lobby in the US and it is pure commercial interest, they have no concern for the loss of innocent life associated with firearms. A well ordered society doesn't need to rely on firearms, and the persistent lie that is the idea that only the individual can protect themselves is ridiculous
LOL, I can understand Smoothy's feeling of protecting himself against The Dufus and his administration. There is no greater threat to freedom than him or his policies. Having a well regulated militia (National Guard and COPS) are not enough sometimes, but a gun driven fueled paranoid fool is a scary proposition, but just as the loony right clings to its guns, the loony left forgets just how dangerous life can be even in the seemingly safest of places.
Not everybody who wants a gun should have them, certainly not criminals and lunatics, and I don't care about what RIGHTS you think you have. I reject totally the premise of armed resistance to OUR government, as sheer LUNACY though, while respecting that some have experiences that makes then afraid to be disarmed. Seems a reasonable first step is accounting for who has what guns, and if you are a criminal, OR LUNATIC, or just irresponsible. Sadly though it's hard to diagnose LUNATICS or irresponsible citizens.
The Australian model looks better all the time.
An interesting read
More Americans Are Carrying Handguns Than Ever Before – Mother Jones
In full disclosure I live in a state with Conceal and carry laws and they hand them out like candy. Gun shows are EVERYWHERE and cash and carry is good to go. Then you have this crap.
https://www.concealedonline.com/star...%20-%20License
Yup, I break into a cold sweat every time I leave the house and go grocery shopping, sure that a murderer is out there somewhere, lurking in the shadows. (And he's probably an NRA member, the "good guy with a gun," like that dude in Las Vegas.)Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
Don't let the NRA hear you say that. In reality a very high percentage of the population are unreliable, not only are there lunatics, but drug users and a great deal of unhappy people, like preppers, who cannot be considered to have a firm grip on reality. I see you realise that a well ordered militia, such as army and police, might actually be the correct reading of the Constitution, so let's get real and deputise all those gun owners then you will have a well regulated militiaQuote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
Some humans are more flawed than others and half have selfish bad intent and don't care. So what?
And corrupt the system with their BS? No way. They can volunteer and see if they QUALIFY. Regardless of the outcome we all are accountable for our own actions. Collectively, or as individuals.Quote:
let's get real and deputise all those gun owners then you will have a well regulated militia
Until Scotty can beam me up, looks like I'm stuck here with the rest of you flawed humans. The problem is the evil humans look exactly like the good ones. Sometimes there is no difference. Scary? Naw! Been this way for a long time. Human ignorance is not new.
Naw look in their eyes
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:35 PM. |