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 03-08-2009, 03:17 PM
 
9,725 posts, read 15,171,221 times
Reputation: 3346

Advertisements

By the way, if you read the Supreme Court decision (the recent decision on the gun ban in Washington) and the discussion they had prior to making the decision, they all agreed that there could be limits on guns.

If the Supreme Court says it is so, it must be so.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-08-2009, 03:25 PM
 
21,026 posts, read 22,150,071 times
Reputation: 5941
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chango View Post
Don't groan, just hear me out and think about it for a second...

Listen, even if you don't like guns you still have a right to own one. It is a right, just like free speech or freedom of religion, written in the same document that lately seems to have more value as policial toilet paper. The ability of a body of people to own weapons signifies a people that cannot be dominated or entirely controlled by someone else. Not just hunting, tradion, or personal protection. Bottom Line.

Of course there are cons to the second ammendment. We see shootings and violence every day on the news and sometimes in our front yards. Each act of violence is a tragedy of imense porportions and should not have happened. It is painful for me to even watch them on TV. It is almost impossible to make ammends and go on, but be warned that human nature unfortunately makes it is easier to seek out someone or something to blame. There are no free rides; every freedom comes with a cost and anyone that tells you otherwise is trying to sell you something.

Soon we will see a new wave of gun control, given strength by fearmongering from polics and the media. They will promise to keep you safe. They will promise you a better world. But, they can't deliver, not any more than they will be able to pay me full social security benefits in 2040. Please realize that by supporting gun control you are exchaging a critical part of your freedom for a shaky promise of security. It's not a fair trade.

More gun control is only the begining of the continued erosion our personal freedoms, and I am sure it won't stop there. I've seen too much of my freedom evaporate in my short life, please don't let them take away any more.
Dear rightie fear-mongerer,

The Supreme Court has already ruled that you have a right to own a gun and no one can take it away from you.

It's over. Quit whining and crying.

You can own a gun and no one can take it away from you.


What don't you understand about "YES" ????
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-08-2009, 03:29 PM
 
Location: Florida
76,971 posts, read 47,629,107 times
Reputation: 14806
Quote:
Originally Posted by SilverOne View Post
England approved the gun ban now they want to ban sharp pointed knives, and by the way the police are now having to go armed with a gun. Crime is up because the bad guys know that no one has a gun. Austrailia went with the gun ban ditto crime is up agian.
The UK gun ban affected only 0.1% of the population, because only 1 in 1000 owned owned a gun before the ban. Therefore it is hard to say what role private guns played in crime prevention in UK before the ban. I'd say that it was next to none. And I'd also say that a ban plays next to none role in crime preventation. Basically such bans are pointless. The UK conservetive party folded under the public demand for the ban after the two massacres they experienced. Both massacres were committed by licenced gun owners, and made the logel gun owners look like the bad guy. Gun crime rose after the ban, but is now in decline in UK. However the numbers have always been very low in UK. Only 1 in 500 crimes includes a gun. In 2006 only 2 police officers were killed by gun in UK.

Anyway, I am pro-2nd and a holder of conceled weapon permit, so I do not personally support bans or excessive taxation of firearms of any kind.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-08-2009, 05:24 PM
 
1,535 posts, read 1,633,959 times
Reputation: 385
Quote:
Originally Posted by Finn_Jarber View Post
The UK gun ban affected only 0.1% of the population, because only 1 in 1000 owned owned a gun before the ban. Therefore it is hard to say what role private guns played in crime prevention in UK before the ban. I'd say that it was next to none. And I'd also say that a ban plays next to none role in crime preventation. Basically such bans are pointless. The UK conservetive party folded under the public demand for the ban after the two massacres they experienced. Both massacres were committed by licenced gun owners, and made the logel gun owners look like the bad guy. Gun crime rose after the ban, but is now in decline in UK. However the numbers have always been very low in UK. Only 1 in 500 crimes includes a gun. In 2006 only 2 police officers were killed by gun in UK.

Anyway, I am pro-2nd and a holder of conceled weapon permit, so I do not personally support bans or excessive taxation of firearms of any kind.
Yes but there is a man convicted of shooting a burglar inside his home, the same man that had broke into his house 2 times before. Burglar no prision sentence but the old man got 10 years for having a shotgun.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-08-2009, 05:54 PM
 
Location: Raleigh, NC
9,059 posts, read 12,971,196 times
Reputation: 1401
Quote:
Originally Posted by UB50 View Post
It's a right... with limits. Just like you don't have unlimited free speech (you can't yell "Fire" in a crowded room just because you feel like it), your rights to have a gun are also subject to limits.
Yelling fire infringes on other's rights because it is guaranteed to incite panic. A mentally stable individual owning an "assault rifle" infringes on no one else's rights by simply owning it if used responsibly.

The limitations of the bill of rights is clear.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-08-2009, 06:04 PM
 
Location: Columbia, SC
37,177 posts, read 19,200,869 times
Reputation: 14900
Quote:
Originally Posted by UB50 View Post
Oh, I get it! What you are saying is they ought to ban bullets since there is no mention of bullets in the Constitution! Gotcha!
There was no such thing in existence as a bullet when the Constitution was written.

They didn't show up for another 75 years or so.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-08-2009, 06:06 PM
 
Location: Florida
76,971 posts, read 47,629,107 times
Reputation: 14806
Quote:
Originally Posted by SilverOne View Post
Yes but there is a man convicted of shooting a burglar inside his home, the same man that had broke into his house 2 times before. Burglar no prision sentence but the old man got 10 years for having a shotgun.
Gun ban and UK self defence laws are two different things. The homeowner would still be in prison if he had killed the burglar with a baseball bat as opposed to shotgun. Therefore the ban has nothing to do with him being in prison.

Or are you under the impression he is in prison because of the UK gun ban?

The debate in UK about this case is about the self defence laws, not the gun ban.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-08-2009, 06:08 PM
 
Location: Florida
76,971 posts, read 47,629,107 times
Reputation: 14806
Quote:
Originally Posted by cuebald View Post
There was no such thing in existence as a bullet when the Constitution was written.

They didn't show up for another 75 years or so.
There is no mention of Air Force either. Only army and navy are mentioned. Does that mean the Air Force is unconstitutional?

And there is no mention of paper money either, only coins.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-08-2009, 06:20 PM
 
1,535 posts, read 1,633,959 times
Reputation: 385

YouTube - UK Protests Gun Ban - Banning Guns Only Disarms Law Abiding Citizens


YouTube - British Freedom: Man Imprisoned For Defending Home

British man in prision for having shotgun and protecting himself agianst buglar. Tony Martin is in jail
4 minutes 12 sec. into video
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-08-2009, 07:03 PM
 
820 posts, read 1,202,995 times
Reputation: 138
Source?

Quote:
Originally Posted by cuebald View Post
There was no such thing in existence as a bullet when the Constitution was written.

They didn't show up for another 75 years or so.
Link?

Mr. Scalia and Mr. Thomas would have a good time with that.
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 07:38 AM.

© 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