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.
People who have the right to life and the right to defend that life, have the right to use whatever they deem necessary for that purpose.
People who do not have the right to life, may need permission (license).
Governments instituted to secure creator endowed rights have no delegated power to deny, infringe or restrict the exercise thereof... unless by consent of the governed.
VITAL TO DISARM
=\=\=\=\=\=\=
You can never have an efficient totalitarian police state, when it has to be “benevolent” and fearful of millions of armed citizens. And you can’t disarm millions of armed citizens when they won’t tell you where the arms are. And you can’t arrest them until you criminalize their disobedience to “reasonable” gun restrictions and “common sense” registration. And you can’t tolerate their belief that they have an “endowed right” to self defense against tyranny, that supersedes your political power of the bigger gun.
• An Armed Populace Fears No Government.
• A Disarmed Populace Fears All Government.
Wtf. The right to own a gun is no different than the right to speak. It’s called the bill of rights for a reason. It’s not the some are more important than others bill of rights . One isn’t any less important than the other.
...
Mexico is inundated with guns. For a country that made guns illegal they sure as hell have a lot of murders.
Hey here is the thing. IF YOU don’t want to own a gun then dont own one. But because you dont want guns around doesn’t give you the authority to take away my right to own one. I am saddened by the fact that some idiot went out grabbed a gun and killed 17 innocent people. I don’t know any normal human being who wouldn’t be saddened,
...
No. Owning a gun IS different than speaking. Most Americans have never and will never own a gun. Virtually all Americans, in various settings, state their opinions using free speech.
So, Mexico is inundated with guns, and it's worked so well there, that you want America to be inundated with guns, also.
Awwwwwwwwwww. You're sad. Not half as sad as the dead. Not half as sad as the mothers and fathers.
We have Neighbor's Watch, every neighbor is watching and taking care for every neighbor. If we see something weird, we call the cops. I don't need an arsenal of guns in my house. We trust our local police and the sheriff.
You tell that to the guy, or group of guys that breaks into your house. Just tell them to wait 15 minutes or so for the police to arrive, and don't start doing horrible things to you or your family until they show up. Oh yeah, if you just give them your valuables they'll probably kill you anyway so you can't identify them. But, by now the police or only ten minutes away, the perps are gone, and they get to "investigate" your murders. Happens all the time.
But you have the neighborhood watch. I'm sure some of them will come to your services.
It is a rarity, and you know it. That doesn't mean we shouldn't get rid of gun free zones like schools to make it more difficult for these nuts. I know about mass slaughter of people in home invasions, car jackings, drug related murders, muggings, burglaries, etc. It is nice to be able to defend against that, and have a bit of a chance.
What isn't a rarity is school shootings. 18 since January 1. That's about 3 per week.
What isn't a rarity is people getting shot to death. 6,880 gun-related deaths, and 13,504 firearm injuries in 2017. That's 36 a day.
People who have the right to life and the right to defend that life, have the right to use whatever they deem necessary for that purpose.
People who do not have the right to life, may need permission (license).
Governments instituted to secure creator endowed rights have no delegated power to deny, infringe or restrict the exercise thereof... unless by consent of the governed.
So if a Constitutional amendment were to pass outlawing guns, you'd have no problem with that?
Sorry you lost me when you said our bill of rights was handed down by the mythical being "our creator".
And the Constitution does reflect the will of the populous as I have said twice now.
I mentioned in one of my earlier posts that the preamble to the Declaration of Independence states that "We are endowed by our creator with certain inalienable rights". The Bill of Rights within the Constitution spells out what those specific rights are.
Quote:
It doesn't say God given. The preamble to the Declaration of Independence states "we are endowed by our creator with certain unalienable rights". It doesn't say we are endowed by our government or endowed by an elected body of individuals. It specifically states that we are endowed by "our creator".
The reason being that no one other than "our creator", whomever or whatever they may be can rescind those certain inalienable rights. The Constitution which is the law of the land specifies what those rights are in the Bill of Rights. This has absolutely nothing to do with religion or a belief in God. All public officials are sworn to uphold the Constitution and Bill of Rights as the laws of the land "so help them God".
It doesn't matter whether you're an atheist or not. It's the basic principle of which this nation was founded. It is not that difficult to understand. You may not like it or completely disagree with it. But it is what it is and no amount of wishful thinking can change that.
And no you are wrong whether you say it twice or two hundred thousand times.
Quote:
There is a procedure for amending the Constitution. The Constitution provides that an amendment may be proposed either by the Congress with a two-thirds majority vote in both the House of Representatives and the Senate or by a constitutional convention called for by two-thirds of the State legislatures. Good luck with that. If you look at a map of the United States showing "Red" and "Blue" counties you'll see that the overwhelming majority of them are "Red". Our system of government was designed so that the major population centers can not dictate public policy throughout the entire country. That's why we have an electoral college.
I guess reading comprehension is not your forte or maybe you are just lost? I'm not just making this stuff up they are based on historical facts. You just choose to ignore it while assigning your own interpretation of it. But that still doesn't change a thing. So I'll guess you'll just have to live with it.
Last edited by Ex New Yorker; 02-18-2018 at 07:07 PM..
I believe in the 2nd Amendment but in my mind the terms are changing
This is nothing new the first regulation of firearms came about 84 years ago.
Did you know in the United States that you can actually own a fully automatic working 50 caliber machine gun if you get the tax stamp for it?
The National Firearms Act (NFA) enacted in 1934, imposes a tax on the transfer and manufacturing of certain firearms, and mandates registration of those firearms. Later amended in 1968, Title II of the Gun Control Act (GCA) removed the requirement for possessors of unregistered firearms to register if it was already possessed by the person. In order to legally acquire NFA firearms you must get approval by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) of a registered weapon.
I am thinking we need to expand the NFA to include semi-automatic weapons which would include semi-automatic handguns.
Revolvers and bolt action rifles would be exempt.
I was in Vietnam and for a year I carried an automatic M16 and to tell you the truth I have a problem when somebody feels that they need this weapon for hunting. They're either one poor shot or something's wrong with them mentally I don't see why you need a semi-automatic weapon for hunting.
I am not saying you shouldn't be able to own one but what I am saying to own one you need to prove that you are personally capable of properly handling this deadly weapon.
Just like it is for a fully automatic machine gun make the ownership of a semi-automatic weapon a Federal felony if you do not have a tax stamp to go along with it.
I love the Second Amendment but we need to do something to stop the idiots and the mentally ill from getting their hands on these weapons that can kill dozens of people and a couple short minutes.
What the tax stamp if I have a registered semi-automatic weapon for me to sell it you also the buyer needs to show proof that they own attack stamp so they can take possession.
Second amendment isnt about hunting or proving need.
No, it's all about protecting the citizens from an evil government but does that go on to say each citizen has the right to possess a nuclear bomb? Where does it end?
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.
Not half as sad as the dead. Not half as sad as the mothers and fathers.
I believe in the 2nd Amendment but in my mind the terms are changing
