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.
Most people against the 2A will continue with their thought process. You can put them in a dozen scenarios and demonstrate where their beliefs are faulted because of human nature but they will hang on to their beliefs.
Perfect example... You have built a saferoom in your house to retreat to in case of a home intrusion. ??? Something is wrong there already...home intruders forcing people to flee into saferooms? Yep, and count on it more often when the economy gets worse.
Home intruders will get wise to this and will locate said saferooms. Would you like to wait for them on your knees and bare handed or in a chair holding a firearm of sorts with a fighting chance?
The federal government would like you on your knees and bare handed as they have convinced many they aren't capable of defending themselves with a firearm - its much too dangerous. They will convince you to give into the demands of the 'bad guys' rather than risk the chance of gunfire, even when the 'bad guys' have the guns.
You are supposed to call the police if you get a chance - however, remember the police are many minutes away when you have few seconds to spare.
I would find it very hard to "usually" be against or "usually" be for a constitutional amendment. Having a gun is not some arbitrary thing that was randomly tacked onto the consititution, and if the guys writing it would be able to see society today they would think "Gee, maybe if we knew society was gonna evolve so much we wouldn't have put that in there".
.
No they wouldn't.
They would be saying "What a bunch of idiots - we gave them every possible scenario for individual freedoms and they're throwing them away. It's a good thing they have the right to bear arms against a tyrannical government if necessary and a process to enact the Liberty Amendments to bail them out of this fundamental transformation of America."
I'm pretty sure some handguns are going to be meaningless in the unlikely event that government deliberately goes after the people with millions more dollars worth of more powerful weapons.
Circulating more gunss doesn't prevent the use of guns.
I'm pretty sure some handguns are going to be meaningless in the unlikely event that government deliberately goes after the people with millions more dollars worth of more powerful weapons.
Circulating more gunss doesn't prevent the use of guns.
I'm pretty sure some handguns are going to be meaningless in the unlikely event that government deliberately goes after the people with millions more dollars worth of more powerful weapons.
Circulating more gunss doesn't prevent the use of guns.
In 1785 Thomas Jefferson wrote to his fifteen-year-old nephew, Peter Carr, regarding what he considered the best form of exercise: "...I advise the gun. While this gives a moderate exercise to the body, it gives boldness, enterprize, and independance to the mind. Games played with the ball and others of that nature, are too violent for the body and stamp no character on the mind. Let your gun therefore be the constant companion of your walks."
All that testosterone talking. Those who live in a household with a gun are four times more likely to die from a gunshot wound than those who do not. And of course, convenience store clerk is not one of the twenty most dangerous jobs, much less the third-most. Old wives tales are told by many more than just old wives.
They would be saying "What a bunch of idiots - we gave them every possible scenario for individual freedoms and they're throwing them away. It's a good thing they have the right to bear arms against a tyrannical government if necessary and a process to enact the Liberty Amendments to bail them out of this fundamental transformation of America."
I think you misunderstood my words. Allow me to break that runon sentence down into something clearer.
Quote:
Originally Posted by justanokie
Having a gun is not
1. some arbitrary thing that was randomly tacked onto the consititution,
2. and if the guys writing it would be able to see society today they would think "Gee, maybe if we knew society was gonna evolve so much we wouldn't have put that in there".
well that still isnt very clear lol. My meaning was that they WOULD NOT be thinking that because its NOT an some arbitrary thing tacked on to the constitution.
As for the liberty amendments....I like Levin but I find it hard to accept the concept of using the constitution to stop the government from trashing said constitution. Its like trying to fix a termite problem in your house by replacing damaged boards with new boards.
A 10 year clerk in a convenience store was approached by a man with a knife who was ready to stab him and rob the store. The clerk pulled out a handgun and probably saved his own life.
He was on tv tonight and he seems like a perfectly nice, easy going guy who simply wanted to live and go home to his family rather than end up in a hospital or a coffin. He's not really angry and says he will just get another job.
Ordinarily I don't like the idea of people having guns, especially handguns. Too many chances for them to get into the wrong hands (like the hands of a crazy person or a young kid). The store fired him because they have a no gun policy. He was registered to carry a gun though. He did know about the no gun policy. I think IF I had to work in a convenience store AT NIGHT, when there had recently been other INCIDENTS, and I was AlONE, I would want something to protect myself. Is there anything else he could have done? Is there some sort of better protection that the management could put in place rather than just putting guys like this out there to get stabbed and robbed?
It seems like your emotions are overriding your sense or right vs. wrong. You liked the guy, he appeared nice, he's not really angry, he lost his job, boo hoo.
So if the guy with the gun didn't appeal to you on an emotional level, would he have been in the wrong?
Nope!
He did what gun owners everywhere do. He defended himself. 'Nuf said.
And gun-people here are doing what gun-people everywhere do -- play on people's fears to misrepresent the facts. Guns do not make you or anyone else safer. Quite the contrary. If there is an actual justification for gun ownership, it will have to come from somewhere else.
And gun-people here are doing what gun-people everywhere do -- play on people's fears to misrepresent the facts. Guns do not make you or anyone else safer. Quite the contrary. If there is an actual justification for gun ownership, it will have to come from somewhere else.
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.
