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 08-05-2019, 06:21 AM
 
Location: annandale, va & slidell, la
7,578 posts, read 3,115,257 times
Reputation: 6389

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by CrownVic95 View Post
No it wouldn't. See my post 216.

And it would only happen in public places. Without cause, no one is going to invade your home to confiscate weapons.
Well that's a relief!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-05-2019, 06:22 AM
 
37,713 posts, read 16,336,939 times
Reputation: 8557
Quote:
Originally Posted by BentBow View Post
That is incorrect. There are only a handful of Elected Sheriff's that actually fight for your right to keep & bear arms.
The majority of the police, want the public unarmed.





https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NdwpCVDjU3E
"There are only a handful of Elected Sheriff's that actually fight for your right to keep & bear arms."


List them AND what the rest of the tens of thousands of officers have said on the issue.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-05-2019, 06:28 AM
 
37,713 posts, read 16,336,939 times
Reputation: 8557
Quote:
Originally Posted by SunGrins View Post
I actually think this is a good idea and probably very close to what the second amendment was all about. The Founding Fathers were suspicious of standing armies and we only had a small force, "The Legion", that was engaged with Indian wars in Ohio. The Whiskey Rebellion (1794) was put down mostly by state militia led by George Washington, the President. That was the last time a sitting President led troops in the field. The second amendment is not about people hoarding guns or distributing them willy-nilly to nutjobs. That is not close to being "well regulated".
I see you did NOT bother to read some of the quotes from the Founding Fathers I posted.

And WE are called the UN-educated!

Example, "well regulated", means "In good working order" which HAS been posted on this site at LEAST a thousand times.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-05-2019, 06:30 AM
 
Location: Midwestern Dystopia
2,377 posts, read 3,073,604 times
Reputation: 2967
Quote:
Originally Posted by hawkeye2009 View Post
180 degrees wrong


The founding fathers would be surprised at all the weapons restrictions. The purpose of the 2nd amendment was to put citizens on par with the military in weaponry. Thus, citizens would be able to overthrow an oppressive government that no longer represented the people.


The 2nd Amendment is the ultimate "checks and balances" if peaceful options fail.

worked out real well for those people in Waco, TX, didn't it?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-05-2019, 06:31 AM
 
37,713 posts, read 16,336,939 times
Reputation: 8557
Quote:
Originally Posted by MMS02760 View Post
The founders that created the electoral college would likely never have envisioned that a person that came in second nearly three million votes behind the leader, could ever become POTUS. I am pretty confident they would not be happy with their system if they knew that could happen. Even more unhappy if they knew the will of the people was ignored twice in five straight presidential elections.

"]The founders that created the electoral college would likely never have envisioned that a person that came in second nearly three million votes behind the leader, could ever become POTUS."


Failed U.S. History, I see!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-05-2019, 06:37 AM
 
37,713 posts, read 16,336,939 times
Reputation: 8557
Quote:
Originally Posted by Winterfall8324 View Post
There is plenty of documented evidence. But you don't need any of that.

If you think critically the answer will become obvious. First give up the assumption that the founding fathers were divine philosophers and accept they were politicians looking after the interests of their new state and the well being of its people.

What where the two largest factors to the pursuit of happiness and population stability? Westward expansion and allowing citizens on the western half of the new country opportunity to settle and trade.

When you have extensive unexplored land (even before the Louisiana purchase) not governed by the state you need to allow a reasonable means for protection. The state did not have the resources or logistics to mandate a full occupation of the dense forest land west, so it is much easier to have each family colonize the land themselves.

What was the other source of US economic interests at the time? Small plantations, mainly south of Maryland. Southern states were also responsible for writing the constitution. Now none of those states could easily guarantee the commodity that is the slave protected, so again it would be easier for these citizens to arm themselves. That way you have wide scale protection without the need for an extensive bureaucracy or tax system.

It was an obvious choice and there was nothing immoral about it, it was just reality. The founders had to balance different interests and maintain the well being of the state. It was an obvious choice.

They were not philosophers thinking ahead 300 years hoping to defend people from the growth of government. They were people more concerned (and occupied) with the problems of their time, they wouldn't care about modern problems that have nothing to do with their time.
"If you think critically the answer will become obvious."


When you start out with INSULTING ACCSATIONS, you are IGNORED RIGHT OFF THE BAT.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-05-2019, 06:38 AM
 
37,713 posts, read 16,336,939 times
Reputation: 8557
Quote:
Originally Posted by njbiodude View Post
Im not going to bother to look it up but our per capita homicide rate by guns is much, much higher than other developed nations. Why is it when Australia banned assault style weapons there were less mass shootings after?
Crime in Australia is going UP!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-05-2019, 06:43 AM
 
Location: Florida
63,449 posts, read 34,664,467 times
Reputation: 10601
Quote:
Originally Posted by HeyJude514 View Post
There, I said it.

In their defense, they had no idea what that amendment would result in some 200+ years later, no way to know the kind of advanced weaponry that would be invented and fall into hands they don't belong in, no way of knowing how Americans would misuse and abuse the amendment in ways they never intended.

But here we are.

It's time to consider amending the Constitution again.
They did not make a mistake, our current politicians are making a mistake by ignoring the "well regulated militia" wording.

A well regulated militia = well functioning militia.

Such militia would not have :

- Criminals
- Drug addicts
- Habitual drunks
- Children
- Mentally ill
- Untrained people
- People incapable of handling firearms


Instead the NRA insists everyone should be allowed to own firearms no matter what.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-05-2019, 06:44 AM
 
37,713 posts, read 16,336,939 times
Reputation: 8557
Quote:
Originally Posted by njbiodude View Post
So next time I'm driving through some crappy red state and get pulled over, I'll just pull out my mangum 44 and tell that officer he ain't givin' me no ticket. How will that work out?

Apparently at the Las Vegas massacre many of the people in the audience were armed. But everyone was afraid either other people or the police would shoot them if they started shooting wildly at the prepetrator so most just hid. That in itself should be an argument against having everyone armed in public.

The problem right now is even states with reasonable restrictions like CA have idiotic states nearby. The guy in Gilroy bought his weapon in Nevada and drove to CA.

Having no guns at public events is a no brainier.
"So next time I'm driving through some crappy red state"

WOW! Talk about 180 degrees out of reality,

Popup being in BLUE California DARE to call red states "crappy"!

If Ca is so GOOD and all those red states are so CRAPY, WHY are so MANY LEAVING Ca and go to those CRAPPY red states.

"The problem right now is even states with reasonable restrictions like CA". Delusional comes to mind!

"Apparently". if maybe, etc, is ALL you have!

"The guy in Gilroy bought his weapon in Nevada and drove to CA." Why did ca let him in?

With all their restrictive laws EXCEPT for illegals, why don't they stop and inspect EVERY vehicle coming into the state? They certainly DON'T want any of these "crappy red state" people dirtying up their beautiful downtown LA and San Fran.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-05-2019, 06:46 AM
 
Location: A safe distance from San Francisco
8,708 posts, read 6,220,984 times
Reputation: 8714
Thought processes of gun advocates/proponents are so petrified that even Sandy Hook didn't phase them. It defies any attempt at rational explanation. One has to wonder, hate as I do to even bring it up, if they would remain equally unreachable if it were their own child.

Bottom line is this....the gun culture is going away. It's just a matter of time. Those who have to be dragged kicking and screaming toward a safe and civil society without a gun on their hip will not be taken seriously on any issue going forward and will thus forfeit all political influence. Folks that fit that description are digging a big hole.
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

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
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - 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 - Top