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.
Handguns are the weapons of choice in most gun homicides in Chicago.
Most gun homicides in Chicago do not target a mass of people.
500 to 700 Chicago homicides per year are not a "mass of people"?
So it is the emotion of a mass shooting that outweighs the actual, total number of people over time? No matter what the anti (legal) gun Progressive say, these "mass shootings" are few in number, and the number of death pales in comparison to inner city gang deaths, automobile deaths, and other risks. To remove the law abiding's rights for these incidents is ineffective in stopping them and ridiculous.
Exactly and the truth is many of our founding fathers and ancestors didnt even like the various amendments to the constitution including George Washington.
True. They worried that the BOR named only SOME rights. And that slick lawyers might start saying things like, "Well, since the right to peaceably assemble is mentioned but the right to ride horses is not, that means the people don't have the right to ride horses."
That's why they added the 9th amendment, which said that just because a certain right wasn't named, that didn't mean that people didn't have it. People's rights were not necessarily restricted to just those named in the Constitution.
When the Constitution was being written, people like Washington felt that the Fed govt had NO powers, except those that WERE explicitly named in the Constitution (this was later codified in the 10th amendment). There was nothing in the original Constitution giving the govt the power to restrict speech, or the right to bear arms etc. So the govt couldn't do those things. No amendment was needed, they felt. And naming certain rights for special protection "elevated" them above other rights. Washington et. al. wanted all rights to be equally important, and thought the BOR was superfluous.
Washington and his buds were certainly right about slick lawyers trying to take the people's rights away, though. Even with the BOR in place, and ironclad rights codified including the right to religion, keeping and bearing arms etc., we have lawyers and judges trying mightily to overturn or ignore them; and even armchair "lawyers" in this very forum spending large amounts of time trying to fool people into believing the Constitution doesn't mean what it says. Washington et. al. saw these people coming a long way off, and did their best to guard the nation against them.
I disagree with you. The only difference between SEMI AUTO AR-15's, and AK clones is their cosmetics. There are so many in the hands of private, law abiding citizens, to confiscate them would be a tremendous hardship, and very difficult. Also, owners of these guns have owned them, and used them responsibly for decades, and would not easily give them up. Also, after shootings continue to occur when AR-15's, and others are banned, they would come after ALL semi auto rifles, pistols, and shotguns. After that, it would be Australia, and further bans. They NEVER stop. It is a push for ultimate government control, and dependency.
With all of your private firearm ownership; your nation has been adjudged less free across the board of recognized individual freedoms...so.....how is the 2nd performing at actually preventing anything mentioned in the 2nd?
I disagree with you. The only difference between SEMI AUTO AR-15's, and AK clones is their cosmetics. There are so many in the hands of private, law abiding citizens, to confiscate them would be a tremendous hardship, and very difficult. Also, owners of these guns have owned them, and used them responsibly for decades, and would not easily give them up. Also, after shootings continue to occur when AR-15's, and others are banned, they would come after ALL semi auto rifles, pistols, and shotguns. After that, it would be Australia, and further bans. They NEVER stop. It is a push for ultimate government control, and dependency.
I just laid in a huge order with Bushmaster. Got a smoking deal in the bulk order so if a ban does happen, I am well positioned to make a mint selling off the stock I laid in.
Chicago has some of the toughest gun control laws in the country. How's that working out?
Lack of laws is not the problem, and neither is the NRA. They can put a million more laws on the books but it serves no purpose if there is no enforcement.
Taking guns away from responsible citizens only leaves guns in the hands of the criminals who don't care about laws anyway. This is the point the easily mortified liberals don't understand. The easily mortified liberals don't have a clue as to what they're rallying against or what kind of a solution is practical and workable.
I never knew Chicago has a fortress around the city? Such a weak argument I see always from right wingers. Guns in Chicago come from Indiana. Guns in NYC come from the south up i-95 and flood the market - every so often the FBI does huge bust of these illegal guns.
Why have any laws to begin with? Criminals by definition don't follow them anyway.
unless the 2nd amendment is repealed, which would take voting to appeal in 38 states or the supreme court illegally changing the constitution, the 2nd amendment will never go away.
and if by some wild happenstance the 2nd amendment was repealed, there are 350 million guns in this country. maybe a third of law abiding citizens would give them up voluntarily. the rest would not.
can you image the government forcibly entering homes, searching them, and taking guns from citizens? that is a scary thought which would not end well for anyone.
If the second amendment was repealed, gun ownership would become a state issue.
I never knew Chicago has a fortress around the city? Such a weak argument I see always from right wingers. Guns in Chicago come from Indiana. Guns in NYC come from the south up i-95 and flood the market - every so often the FBI does huge bust of these illegal guns.
Why have any laws to begin with? Criminals by definition don't follow them anyway.
So, you agree gun laws DON'T Work? Criminals either steal them, or buy them illegally. It will always be that way.
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.
