The Second: "Well Regulated" (polls, Obama, concealed carry, examples)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The design of cars is constantly being changed to make them safer. A license is required to drive one. Seatbelts must be worn to increase safety. Yes, people get in accidents, but we EXPECT automakers to design and manufacture their product so that risk of injuries and deaths is reduced.
And without government intervention, this would happen anyway. What automaker would advertise their "death mobile"?
Quote:
Originally Posted by kayanne
Electricians have regulations to follow so that the public is as safe as possible.
They vary by location. During the construction of my house, I was able to run all of the low voltage wiring for my alarm, audio/video system and home automation. I found out at other forums, that is different in other states.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kayanne
Many neighborhoods and towns require locked fencing around swimming pools to prevent drowning.
That's because people can't control their kids. I'll bet that their insurance company requires this as well. Finally, the fence around the community pool did not stop us from midnight swims from about age 12.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kayanne
In all of your examples (except guns) we have laws and regulations to minimize the risks.
All current guns are sold with a trigger lock or at least the new ones I purchased. They also go through extensive testing at the ATF before they go on the market. That includes safety testing as well as the ability to not be modified to fire fully automatic.
Then there are the laws. For example, if you have an AK-47 receiver that has a trigger and hammer pin holes drilled in it, you are fine to sell it. If you have a 3rd hole drilled for an auto sear (even if you don't own one) then you can end up end the federal pen for 10 years. David Olofson received 30 months when his gun malfunctioned and fired more than one round per trigger pull. It took the ATF over a year of testing and this only happened on a brand of ammo that had soft primers. So if you think this is an unregulated industry then you are not well informed.
The phrase "well-regulated" was in common use long before 1789, and remained so for a century thereafter. It referred to the property of something being in proper working order. Something that was well-regulated was calibrated correctly, functioning as expected. Establishing government oversight of the people's arms was not only not the intent in using the phrase in the 2nd amendment, it was precisely to render the government powerless to do so that the founders wrote it.
I thought you gun fondlers might like this.
My ex is now a right winger (his flavor of the month politics varies between various right wing types - sometimes he's Libertarian, sometimes he's Republican, etc.), so he's all happy over guns. He calls me sometimes just to aggravate me. (I should mention he's an attorney, as is my current bf). Anyway, so we got into a discussion/debate/venom spitting match about the 2nd Amendment.
I asked him to explain what the framers meant by a "well-regulated militia."
He said, "Why do you need to know that?"
I said, "Curious."
He said, "Why does that matter?"
I said, "Because I'm curious what you think, that's all!! Why are you so defensive about this?"
He said, "I'm not. I'm sure at one time it referred to the militia, and provided an assurance that they'd be able to keep their muskets, but that doesn't matter in 2013, so don't worry your pretty little head about it."
I said, "Oh F-U. However, I have another question. I often go on a website where there are a lot of gun fondlers, and they claim that the amendment hasn't got anything to do with the militia."
He said, "Gun fondlers? hahaha! Well, good for them! Right now it doesn't matter if it ever did."
I said, "Ever did what?"
He said: "If it ever referred to the militia. The SC has ruled ignoring the militia. Does that answer your question?"
I asked, "No, but I have another question. What happens if and when the SC goes back and rules again, and differently, taking into account that the SECOND AMENDMENT REFERRED TO MILITIAS?"
He said, "We'll cross that bridge when we come to it. For right now, the militia matters not at all. You're just gonna have to put up with all those gun fondlers fondling their guns."
I already knew this, but wanted to hear it from another right winger.
Ah, the SC, though. You gotta love 'em. They ruled that corporations are human beings, and ignore what the Second Amendment says. They need their legal _ss_s kicked ever so well.
When you can have an adult discussion I'll respond...as long as you must name call you are admitting you have NOTHING to say!
Oh, and holding up a man that was stupid enough to be with you as evidence of gun people's stupidity doesn't exactly tarnish the gun rights side of the hall...just YOU and the man willing to have put up with you!
I don't want to take your guns... I swear. I do want large clips to be limited and mandatory background checks to be expanded.
Since the second amendment uses the words "well regulated", and regulation has before been affirmed by the Supreme Court-- How can anyone claim that it would be unconstitutional to limit large clips and institute mandator background checks?
Why? Neither of these would do diddly to stop people from committing heinous acts with a firearm. If you support limiting magazine sizes or universal background checks, you're drinking the kool-aid that is supplied to you by those that either a)want to pass feel-good legislation and stand around patting themselves on the back for solving a problem that they didn't solve or b) see a new assault weapon/large magazine ban combined with a national registry (how else would they enforce the universal background checks?) as a good first step toward disarming U.S. Citizens.
Educate yourself on who is committing crimes with firearms and why they are committing those crimes, then come back and tell us all how much good either one of these measures would do when it came to reducing firearms deaths.
While you're at it, take a look at the 1994 AWB legislation and why it was allowed to sunset. It had zero effect on firearms homicides, so why would we want to do the same thing again, but make it even more restrictive on the people who actually obey the current laws?
When you can have an adult discussion I'll respond...as long as you must name call you are admitting you have NOTHING to say!
Oh, and holding up a man that was stupid enough to be with you as evidence of gun people's stupidity doesn't exactly tarnish the gun rights side of the hall...just YOU and the man willing to have put up with you!
Holding up an EX as a stupid person is so dang funny! I mean...either THEY were stupid for being with YOU or YOU were stupid for being with THEM....or BOTH...it doesn't really prove anything beyond that...
...her arguments never actually make sense though...she's just a lonely bitter person that needs some drama...so she comes here to annoy us gun people...well at least we HAVE something to fondle! LOL...jealous?
The design of cars is constantly being changed to make them safer. A license is required to drive one. Seatbelts must be worn to increase safety. Yes, people get in accidents, but we EXPECT automakers to design and manufacture their product so that risk of injuries and deaths is reduced.
Electricians have regulations to follow so that the public is as safe as possible.
Many neighborhoods and towns require locked fencing around swimming pools to prevent drowning.
In all of your examples (except guns) we have laws and regulations to minimize the risks.
I'm not even saying that I am for gun control or limits on rounds or bans on "assault weapons" or anything else. I'm just saying that your "logic" wasn't compelling for me.
Interesting. Did you not know that firearm manufacturers have been improving firearm safety for many many years? Many safety features have been implemented to today's firearms. Safeties such as trigger safety, fire pin block, round indicator, cocking indicator, decocker, etc. etc. etc.
Try to drop and even slap a today's modern firearm, none will fire on drop.
There have been many regulations and laws to make guns safer such as trigger locks and even frame locks.
Here's something I thought I might add just for fun.
That is plain stupid! We have laws to make certain activities CRIMINAL...and then we can prosecute that crime.
We have plenty of laws to make killing someone a crime and then the ability to arrest the criminal.
What the gun grabbers want to do is make self defense a crime!
That is why they go after an object that is a tool and does no harm except when an evil person misuses that tool.
They don't want to go after the evildoer...just make criminals out of the people whom might stop that evil doer.
The Left loves evil...they promote it and try to stop anything that might stop evil.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
BOUNCE!
