Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 09-29-2013, 09:47 PM
 
Location: Las Vegas,Nevada
9,282 posts, read 6,740,791 times
Reputation: 1531

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by NOTaTHEIST View Post
It's not my fault the 2nd is ambiguous and horribly worded.

Edit: This is precisely why it needs to be ratified for a third time. I've speculated in the past that they understood it didn't give rights for sales and production to specifically reduce "arms" for future generations, and worded it poorly with intention.

Edit 2: Something else just occurred to me. Future generations would still have a right to keep and bear arms... if they could somehow come by those arms without purchasing them. We could ratify the 2nd to include such wording as they're allowed to be passed down from one generation to the next. Or we might allow private sales of the "arms" themselves. At any rate, the 2nd does not address how one is to come by the arms they're allowed to "keep and bear". The word "bear" in this context implies display or show, it doesn't even really address your rights for discharging, which by the way is highly regulated.
its not ambiguous and horribly worded, you just want us to chagne it, so you are your statist thugs can strip us of our rights..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-29-2013, 09:48 PM
 
Location: Las Vegas,Nevada
9,282 posts, read 6,740,791 times
Reputation: 1531
Quote:
Originally Posted by NOTaTHEIST View Post
Of course, but none of these other things are generally specifically design (or even nearly efficient at) to harm or kill something. Typically, all these other devices are primarily designed with other, non-human-harmful uses in mind. Guns are specifically designed with harming something (generally human or other animals) in mind.

Edit: I suppose you could be like Homer in that very ironic episode of the Simpson's where he used his gun to turn off his lights and TV. It was quick and efficient, but one use only! LOL
what if it was used for a competition? hole in theory, and if anything you statist or hormer..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-29-2013, 10:06 PM
 
Location: Southern Oregon
3,040 posts, read 5,000,282 times
Reputation: 3422
Quote:
Originally Posted by NOTaTHEIST View Post
Of course, but none of these other things are generally specifically design (or even nearly efficient at) to harm or kill something. Typically, all these other devices are primarily designed with other, non-human-harmful uses in mind. Guns are specifically designed with harming something (generally human or other animals) in mind.

Edit: I suppose you could be like Homer in that very ironic episode of the Simpson's where he used his gun to turn off his lights and TV. It was quick and efficient, but one use only! LOL
I have been around firearms ever since I could walk, I'm 63 now, in my short lived life I have never seen a firearm purposely kill some one or something, there has to be a person behind the butt. A firearm by itself is no more harmful than a rock. If your intent is to kill something, you will find the means to do it irregardless of the choice of instrument.

If we are going to ban weapons based on purpose of design, then we could apply that to firearms, bows, knives, slingshots, shall I keep going. The danger of these lays in the intent of the user and not the instrument itself.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-30-2013, 10:34 PM
 
Location: Coos Bay, Oregon
7,138 posts, read 11,027,344 times
Reputation: 7808
Quote:
Originally Posted by Terryj View Post
I have been around firearms ever since I could walk, I'm 63 now, in my short lived life I have never seen a firearm purposely kill some one or something, there has to be a person behind the butt. A firearm by itself is no more harmful than a rock. If your intent is to kill something, you will find the means to do it irregardless of the choice of instrument.

If we are going to ban weapons based on purpose of design, then we could apply that to firearms, bows, knives, slingshots, shall I keep going. The danger of these lays in the intent of the user and not the instrument itself.
Again 70% of murders are committed with guns. Guns are the major problem, not bows, knives, or slingshots. Second, guns can be banned. They have been in many countries. It is not practical to ban these other items, and there is no reason to ban them. The number of people getting killed with slingshots or bows is insignificant. It probably doesn't even happen.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-30-2013, 10:38 PM
 
3,040 posts, read 2,578,539 times
Reputation: 665
Quote:
Originally Posted by KaaBoom View Post
Again 70% of murders are committed with guns. Guns are the major problem, not bows, knives, or slingshots. Second, guns can be banned. They have been in many countries. It is not practical to ban these other items, and there is no reason to ban them. The number of people getting killed with slingshots or bows is insignificant. It probably doesn't even happen.
Take away the guns and the rates for all the other methods will go up!

It's the PERSON'S intent to cause harm.
And no, they can't be banned. We have the 2A. The day you try to repeal it, will be the day you start a Civil war.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-30-2013, 10:43 PM
 
Location: SF Bay Area
12,287 posts, read 9,819,598 times
Reputation: 6509
Quote:
Originally Posted by KaaBoom View Post
Again 70% of murders are committed with guns. Guns are the major problem, not bows, knives, or slingshots. Second, guns can be banned. They have been in many countries. It is not practical to ban these other items, and there is no reason to ban them. The number of people getting killed with slingshots or bows is insignificant. It probably doesn't even happen.
So banning drugs has stopped people from using drugs?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-01-2013, 12:38 AM
 
Location: Coos Bay, Oregon
7,138 posts, read 11,027,344 times
Reputation: 7808
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jean71 View Post
Take away the guns and the rates for all the other methods will go up!
Yeah, right. People will switch to committing mass-murder with slingshots.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-01-2013, 12:48 AM
 
Location: Ohio
13,933 posts, read 12,893,585 times
Reputation: 7399
Quote:
Originally Posted by KaaBoom View Post
Again 70% of murders are committed with guns. Guns are the major problem, not bows, knives, or slingshots. Second, guns can be banned. They have been in many countries. It is not practical to ban these other items, and there is no reason to ban them. The number of people getting killed with slingshots or bows is insignificant. It probably doesn't even happen.
No, actually they can't, as the courts have consistently ruled. So long as the Second Amendment remains in effect, guns cannot be banned.

Don't like it? Tough! Repeal the Second, which would be nearly impossible.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-01-2013, 04:51 AM
 
46,278 posts, read 27,088,282 times
Reputation: 11126
Quote:
Originally Posted by KaaBoom View Post
Yeah, right. People will switch to committing mass-murder with slingshots.
One again, we are talking about murders....how many at a time does not matter...it still murder...

Way to change the goal post again, typical...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-01-2013, 04:53 AM
 
20,948 posts, read 19,047,114 times
Reputation: 10270
I just bought a "gunnut". It hasn't killed anyone yet.

Maybe I need the rest of the gun?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:40 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top