Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
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)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 12-31-2019, 06:48 AM
 
Location: San Diego
50,316 posts, read 47,056,299 times
Reputation: 34087

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by mkpunk View Post
The point is guns were single shot with rather long reload/reshoot times, not the guns of today.
Nope

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Girandoni_air_rifle
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-31-2019, 06:53 AM
 
Location: Morrison, CO
34,232 posts, read 18,584,601 times
Reputation: 25806
Quote:
Originally Posted by USMC1984 View Post
You are incorrect! Fully automatic guns were invented 70+ years before the Constitution was written.

Try to do some research before spouting nonsense.

Using their flawed "logic" solely based on emotion, the First Amendment should be further limited because we now have technology the Founding Fathers didn't have. Computers, Smart Phones, the Internet, Social Media, TV, Radio, Satellites.....


They are being idiotic to limit our Natural Rights. Government DOES NOT GRANT US RIGHTS.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-31-2019, 08:02 AM
 
Location: Cape Cod
24,502 posts, read 17,239,538 times
Reputation: 35796
Quote:
Originally Posted by USMC1984 View Post
How about since the FBI statistics show that 80-90% of violent crime is committed by prior convicted felons, we stop letting them out to prey on innocents again...poof, 80-90% reduction right there.



I agree. We need to stop being so easy on criminals that use a gun in their crimes.



I don't know how many times I have heard about a drug dealer in my state being caught with a pile of drugs, a stack of cash and a tool of the trade an illegal gun. We have a law in my state that if you are caught with an unregistered gun and or bullets you go to jail for one year. It is really rare that this is enforced but instead it is plea bargained away and the gun toting dealer is given a slap on the wrist by our liberal judges.



I say lock them up. If you use a gun in your crime you go to prison.



I don't agree with everyone being armed because we have far too many yahoos out there that would be shooting each other over a parking spot or if a threat was perceived they would pull their guns and just start shooting possibly killing innocent people.



If someone wants a gun and can demonstrate they can handle the responsibility of storing, carrying and shooting one then they should be able to.



It is really ironic how the Democrats are always pushing to limit the Rights of the law abiding to own a gun but they are willing to go soft on criminals that use them?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-31-2019, 09:23 AM
 
19,724 posts, read 10,128,243 times
Reputation: 13091
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cape Cod Todd View Post
I agree. We need to stop being so easy on criminals that use a gun in their crimes.



I don't know how many times I have heard about a drug dealer in my state being caught with a pile of drugs, a stack of cash and a tool of the trade an illegal gun. We have a law in my state that if you are caught with an unregistered gun and or bullets you go to jail for one year. It is really rare that this is enforced but instead it is plea bargained away and the gun toting dealer is given a slap on the wrist by our liberal judges.



I say lock them up. If you use a gun in your crime you go to prison.



I don't agree with everyone being armed because we have far too many yahoos out there that would be shooting each other over a parking spot or if a threat was perceived they would pull their guns and just start shooting possibly killing innocent people.



If someone wants a gun and can demonstrate they can handle the responsibility of storing, carrying and shooting one then they should be able to.



It is really ironic how the Democrats are always pushing to limit the Rights of the law abiding to own a gun but they are willing to go soft on criminals that use them?
A drug dealer here who murdered one of his customers got a whole 9 years. He will be out in 6. Ridiculous.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-31-2019, 09:29 AM
 
28,122 posts, read 12,603,511 times
Reputation: 15341
Quote:
Originally Posted by BentBow View Post
The government does not get to decide what arms I can keep or bear. We didn't submit to telling them "small arms" of the governments choice. We told the government... We will keep & bear arms. You decide what arms you will bear. Not government, or the entire purpose of the 2nd amendment is defeated.
Right!


If I want a full auto...I WILL go get one, I could not care less what govt thinks about it!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-02-2020, 09:25 AM
 
3,348 posts, read 2,312,464 times
Reputation: 2819
Happy New Years seems to be happy new laws, I am surprised why so many are still so excited about New Years these days, I bet many of them are gun laws, I be curious whether the gun violence issue is caused by too many laws and not too little. It appears other countries even with high gun ownership rates don’t have over a thousand gun laws. It also appears police there are not afraid of gun violence when they approach a citizen seeing that they rarely carry their own firearms on a normal day. .
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-23-2020, 11:16 AM
 
Location: Nebraska
4,530 posts, read 8,868,319 times
Reputation: 7602
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dane_in_LA View Post
That's probably why the US has a murder and incarceration rate that's the envy of every Western nation. Good thinking.
Dane have you ever noticed that almost all of the states and Cities with the STRICTEST gun control Lwas are the ones with the highest CRIME rates also? But to notice that you have to think.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-23-2020, 12:13 PM
 
Location: Nebraska
4,530 posts, read 8,868,319 times
Reputation: 7602
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clarallel View Post
As to your question, the Second Amendment was originally intended to ensure that men would be able to come at the drop of a hat to act as a military force against an outside threat, since there was no army at the time.
Partially right. However the Second Amendment states "A well regulated militia. .., the Right of the PEOPLE to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

The PEOPLE included Men of all ages and I think Women were included even though Women did not achieve voting rights until much later. Updates to the Constitution later included people of BOTH SEXES and ALL races who were citizens.

There has been a lot of confusion over the "well regulated Militia" part of the Second Amendment. Confusion created intentionally (IMHO) by elitists for the most part that look down on the ignorant "masses".

Here is the way I interpret that phrase. BTW I do not have an advanced degree or a law degree. I am probably somewhere in the middle of the crowd as far as IQ. However it seems OBVIOUS to me that the Framers of our Constitution wanted the Militia to be "well regulated'. What does well regulated mean? . Does that mean laws? Who is to be doing this regulating? It seems to me that the "the right of the PEOPLE to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed" answers that. Did they mean for CONGRESS to do the regulating? NO they meant for the people TO DO THE REGULATING by making sure the PEOPLE were armed.

The Founding Fathers feared "standing armies" for a reason.
Militias at the time were composed of Men from age 16 to 45 IIRC. BTW "Gangs" are composed for the most part of young Men. If the militia were the only ones meant to be armed the RKBA would apply only to that group. RKBA applied to all citizens at that time and should to this day.

Legislators in many jurisdictions SHOULD realize that the PEOPLE are the ultimate REGULATORS.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-23-2020, 12:37 PM
 
Location: NW Nevada
18,161 posts, read 15,632,241 times
Reputation: 17152
Quote:
Originally Posted by rstevens62 View Post
But the same principle still applies, yes, the people were using single shot muskets, but larger guns were available, even 10 ton cannons (which private citizens could own btw if they could afford to).


The soldiers and civilians were using the same type of firearms...it would be no different today, military troops use full automatic weapons when they are out on patrol or fighting in a battle, why should civilians not be able to own the same kind?


Theres not many reasons why a nations govt would desire to limit what kind of weapons their civilians can have!! There is usually a good reason for it when it does happen (history tells the tale over and over again).
The 1938GCA restricted full auto but did not prohibit it it per se. If we as a citizen have a need or desire or both for full auto we have to pay an exorbitant fee, and the government gets to crawl all over up with a microscope every year and we will be part of a central title 3 registry.

Oh but test assured the criminals, gangscartel footdoldiers what have you follow all this and are thereby denied access to full auto capable arms.

Very very little if any violent crime involving firearms is or has ever been prevented by any gun law restricting firearms citizens access to guns.

That being said I dont have so much heartburn with the current BC system as I have seen it stop convicted felons from getting a weapon from a dealer. I used to help a buddy in his gun shop.

Thing is we denied the sale and we also reported attempts as parole violations to the PD and SO. But not ONCE did LE follow up. In one particular case this ended badly.

A guy we both knew full well was not even supposed to walk into a gun store for any reason tried to buy a gun one day. We ran the BC knowing full well he would be denied as he was a two time loser already on drugs weapons and domestic violence.

We immediately reported the attempt to both look al PD and the SO. They did nothing. And the creep got an illegal gun off the street that turned out to be a stolen gun from one of his I'm sure many...acquaintances.

He then tried to murder his ex girlfriend with it. If LE had done their job that would not have happened. He would have been back in prison for an egregious parole violation.

It was a serious black eye for local LE. I guess my buddy and I should have made a citizen arrest when the creep came in the shop. But that would be vigilante action.

Thankfully he was not successful in his murder attempt but he should not have even been given the opportunity to try. LE should have gotten our report and immediately tracked him down. And it's not like this guy was hard to find. It's not a big town. Hell my buddy and I knew well where he lived and his known associates. The local tweaker crowd.

No excuse for this and we upright law abiding gun owners get blamed for crap like that. The grabbers want to see us punished for the actions of flea bags even as we bend over backwards trying to keep them under control.

The current BC system does work. It works pretty well. But if LE drops the ball it doesn't matter how well it works at a licensed selling point. These rabid ban happy confiscation crazy gun owner haters are truly clueless.

Their hatred and bigotry against all gun owners blinds them to the truth of things. They are no better than any other hate group. Not one bit.

My whole life in the firearms owning and using population has brought me into interaction with the very best quality of people on the planet. Folks who would give those in need the shirt off their backs and even lay down their very lives to defend people they dont know from Adam needs be.

People who truly care about their communities and watch out for the decent people in them. But instead of respect and thanks we see derision, stereotyping, some of the nastiest labels and name calling imaginable, and strident calls for our rights to be taken.

We are labeled by these neo Democrat nuts as backward, ignorant, uneducated, unintelligent, racist, abusive, violent, misogynistic, (though women make up a huge part of our community) and all sorts of other nasty monikers.

Personally I'm plumb fed up to the gills with all this lunatic leftist dung slinging. I proudly stand shoulder to shoulder with all the men and women like me out here that make up the 2A community.

The latter are the very best quality of people one can ever hope to know and I dearly love them one and all. I know in no uncertain terms that I can count on them to be right there for me in time of need and they in turn can count on me n mine to have their backs no matter how bad things may get.

The hateful and grossly bigoted nutcase leftists wish they could say the same about their segment of society.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-23-2020, 01:54 PM
 
Location: NW Nevada
18,161 posts, read 15,632,241 times
Reputation: 17152
Quote:
Originally Posted by rstevens62 View Post
If that is how you see it, then people would eventually get used to NEW or tougher restrictions.


This mindset, that its 'the norm' to accept that the public cannot own 1986+ automatics is a BIG part of the problem...the Constitution of this country says WE CAN OWN these weapons!


This just proves what I said in my other post, people use this to justify compliance and obedience with the laws on automatics, they may go around talking about how patriotic they are but in reality, they are fully compliant with the govts laws at all times...thats not exactly 'patriotism'.
I dont disagree. In principle I fully agree. The acquiescence given the restrictions in the 1938 GCA I did not say I support. Just that has been made acceptable by default. And I am adamantly opposed to further restrictions that the ban advocates are pushing for extending into the semi auto class.

I'm not going to "get used to" any such reaching. I flat would not comply with any such further restrictions. I believe the citizens should have access without government oversight to the very same personal arms the military and even more so now LE has.

That's the real kicker for me. If the cops can be equipped with firearms just like the military we the people bloody sure should. At the end of the day LE sure as hell ain't special that way in my mind.

If they need these types of weapons just to patrol the streets we live on maybe (big maybe) for an 8 hour shift the need for them is greater for we citizens. Since the criminals that LE is facing have such weapons denying the same weapons to those of us who live out here is hardly appropriate.

If I am at risk of having to face an SUV full of gang bangers with AKs, Uzis and M4s I should be fully able to return fire with an M 60 or M249 at a fixed position in my house.

If faced with a threat like that I tend to agree that my 1911 or even my AR or M1A seems like a bit less gun than would be needed. Criminals sure are under no restrictions as to what they have.

Any more with the money they have to play with criminals, especially in the drug trade, have far more than just full auto. They have that plus destructive devices like grenades, RPGs, explosive materials like C4, mines, grenade launchers like the M203 and more.

The latter stuff falls outside of firearms of course, but still requires exorbitant fees and special licenses for citizens that criminals dont bother with.

But I do agree that the title 3 requirements for a citizen to own full auto capable weapons are rather useless for preventing criminals from using them. Just as useless as making drugs illegal. Those laws sure dont prevent drug use and selling.
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
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

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

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:26 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - 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, 36, 37 - Top