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.
It is not arms, without cap & ball.(see Militia Act)
Milita Act, not 2nd Amendment?
I know the difference eludes you.
Quote:
It does not say the right to keep and bear a metal and wooden club.
Apparently, it means whatever you want it to say.
Quote:
That issue has been settle long ago. They have gotten a supreme court to say some ammo is illegal(shall not be infringed and all that)
The very government we told not to mess with our arms, made damn sure we didn't have the arms they soon acquired. The 2nd amendment doesn't say, the right of the government to keep & bear arms. No where, so it must have been left to the 10th amendment and states could have arms.... Wait?? Before the Civil War, it was just like that. The Federal Government power was all state militia.
The New York 51st Battalion Virgina 33rd Regiment. Maryland 12th Calvary. Alabama 3rd.......
So much fail....Even Antonin Scalia disagrees with you.
I'll always see you as this:
Quote:
Originally Posted by BentBow
I personally, as flesh & blood individual am tired of being bullied. I can only be bullied, by someone is more powerful than I.
Being the small guy in my class at school, I had my fair share of bullies. I learned how to deal with them, quite effectively. Strike first and strike hard, when threatened with harm.
Some one who is small and fearful. It colors your entire life. What a terrible way to live.
This is absolutely ridiculous. Even in England where guns are very restricted, they have moved to arm their police officers for a reason.
Not the reason that guns make them any safer! Which is my point. As we speak, an East Coast police officer is recovering from injuries he received when an ambusher put three shots into his arm. He was able to return fire and wound his attacker. Failure all around. Inept attacker, LUCKY law enforcement officer, and a questionable outcome.
Quote:
Originally Posted by chicagogeorge
Let me quote what a Chicago detective had told me.
What police officer (or gun advocate) doesn't think that America is chock full of armed thugs bent on rape and pillage? They all do. Law enforcent can be excused, perhaps, but the general law abiding public? I think not. I used to live in a very dangerous part of town and whenever I saw certain people there, I knew it was because they were carrying, and emboldened by what they thought was some kind of force field of invincibility. Yeah, right. Yes there are a lot of guns out there but that does not mean we have to accept that the only way forward is to just let the good, the bad and the ugly go at it and let God sort them out. Again, if it were not so that there is an inordinate amount of collateral damage to innocent (and not so innocent0 familiars of the gun owning general public there would not be much to say. Do you really think this thread is because gang thugs in Chicago's South Side murder each other daily??!! This thread is (a reaction to) because nice people... young children, innocent middle class mothers and fathers lose their lives several times a week under tragic circumstances, all related in some way to a firearm.
Quote:
Originally Posted by chicagogeorge
Sorry you are the one that is arrogant and insensitive to a right that I have specifically stated in the Constitution as you want to severely restrict my right or eliminate it all together (which one is it?).
Most people just want to restrict your Constitutional rights. You should be glad you are dealing with one of them in President Obama. If I were in a position to have any influence only the State Police and the Military would have any real access to firearms. Local police and the general public would have long guns only. Small arms would be banned outright. They are a menace. Poorly secured, poorly used, and with scant accountability for their poor utilization. I'd end all that. Can I be any more clear?
Nor do I wish to leave any of you gun types comfortless. Just handgunless. I have little doubt that without the low bar of projectile weapons to sell to the general public at insane markup, that without that, the development of superior, but non-lethal, weaponry would explode.
I would have my glove in my hand taking a swat, more than not these days.
I didn't mean personally toward you, BentBow. More a commentary on how people got on back then. It'd be amusing to see it today, especially in a bar context. A bar fight that starts with a glove slap lol.
Police should not be armed and by extension neither should the Secret Service. Not because armed protection has failed at times, but because armed protection fails all the time. When it hasn't failed, it hasn't been needed. That is about 99.9% of the time.
You are really going above and beyond to prove you have absolutely no idea what so ever about firearms, the police, self defense or crime. Absolutely 100% ignorant. You've clearly done zero, non what so ever, research into the subject beyond listening to the echo chamber in your own closed mind. You could easily be shown thousands of cases where armed protection not only didn't fail but was the only option and you still wouldn't admit you're wrong.
I think you meant looking down the barrel of a gun. But in any case you're wrong. Look to the vast majority of European countries. Most are democratic.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BentBow
You will be looking at the barrel of a gun, if you do not consent to give up your rights.
That is a FACT.
Most people just want to restrict your Constitutional rights. You should be glad you are dealing with one of them in President Obama. If I were in a position to have any influence only the State Police and the Military would have any real access to firearms. Local police and the general public would have long guns only. Small arms would be banned outright. They are a menace. Poorly secured, poorly used, and with scant accountability for their poor utilization. I'd end all that. Can I be any more clear?
Nor do I wish to leave any of you gun types comfortless. Just handgunless. I have little doubt that without the low bar of projectile weapons to sell to the general public at insane markup, that without that, the development of superior, but non-lethal, weaponry would explode.
This is all that I needed to read to fully understand the type of person you are.
Thankfully someone like yourself has no influence. ZERO.
Thankfully, we have a system in place that protects my Constitutional rights
Thankfully, President Obama does not rule alone, or make laws, and can be checked by the other two branches of government.
Thankfully, amending the constitution is no piece of cake. The 2A will be around a lot longer than you or I
Thankfully, I don't live in a society where citizens are defenseless. There are millions of guns in the hands of criminals. Do you actually believe that I will be safer if I no longer would be able to legally protect my home and family?
Y'know what's strange? Gun homicides in the US have been decreasing since the peak in 1993.
Although I don't think it's as clear what factors are responsible for the decrease. If these factors were easily identified, I think most folks would be willing to consider.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BentBow
Guess what happened February 28, 1994.... Just guess.
HINT: Leading up to this date above, is a comparison what happened when the word of limiting our choices again, always gets out. 1933 was a stellar year for fully automatic weapon sales.
When more guns are sold, the murder rate always goes down.
beyond bentbows suggestion, 1993 was about the time when shall issue concealed carry laws started coming into effect around the country. when they first came into effect in florida, the criminal element started preying on tourists rather than residents. the reason? as one criminal stated, he knew that tourists would not be armed, and he didnt want to get shot.
beyond bentbows suggestion, 1993 was about the time when shall issue concealed carry laws started coming into effect around the country. when they first came into effect in florida, the criminal element started preying on tourists rather than residents. the reason? as one criminal stated, he knew that tourists would not be armed, and he didnt want to get shot.
Hi there rbohm,
I appreciate the less drama, more critical thinking style evidenced in your reply. I think it's important to consider all possible, plausible factors.
Discouraging folks from looking into, researching, studying important issues doesn't make sense to me.
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.
