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)
 
Old 10-05-2017, 04:24 PM
 
Location: Richland, Washington
4,904 posts, read 6,017,633 times
Reputation: 3533

Advertisements

People were slaughtering each other long before guns were invented. Taking guns away won't change that, it will only make people use different weapons.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-05-2017, 04:28 PM
 
Location: Gone
25,231 posts, read 16,947,214 times
Reputation: 5932
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roboteer View Post
A couple hundred years ago, the Framers studied past governments, their efforts to disarm their people, the efforts of common criminals to assault, rob, rape, and murder law-abiding citizens, and the programs some govts ran to commit mass murder on their own (disarmed, of course) populations.

And they concluded that a citizenry would be better off, more prosperous, and safer if govt had NO authority to restrict or take away their firearms. Part of that came from stark evidence that if govt were given just a little authority, say to make a few "common sense" regulations, that govt would inevitably reach for more authority, and more, until it assumed the power to disarm the entire populace. It happened over and over in history, both in countries that had guns, and in countries before guns were invented.

After studying the problem from every angle for years, the Framers concluded that far more deaths would happen when govts had the authority to restrict or take away their populations' weapons, than would happen if the govt had NO authority to do that. Even including the occasional madman who would go into a public place and shoot people until the cops arrived.

Fast forward to present-day United States. The gun-rights-haters have tried law after law to restrict ownership of guns, from waiting periods to monthly purchases to registration to so-called "assault weapon" bans to regulations so onerous as to amount to complete bans. And the murder rates, rapes, etc. And criminals have kept right on using guns against the population, at levels high enough that liberals still demand more and more gun laws.

It has become clear even to the dimmest gun-rights-hater that these gun laws just don't work, by their own admission. And yet they keep demanding more of the same.

It looks like the Founding Fathers were right - they saw these haters coming a mile away, and wrote a Constitution that flatly bans them from making any such law. And they were equally right in predicting that, once govt was allowed to make "just a few common-sense restrictions", they would go on to make more and more, without end.

Now the haters are demanding law after law, despite of literally centuries of history that shows their anti-gun laws have never worked. The OP is right in announcing that it's too late for gun control... but perhaps in a way he didn't think of. By demonstrating so effectively that their "gun control" does nothing but restrict the law-abiding, they have proven to the world that they are lying when they say they are doing it "to make everyone safer". In fact they are making us LESS safe... and it is impossible that they haven't noticed that.

We can only conclude that the people still demanding more "gun control" laws, are doing it for a more nefarious purpose. After decades of proving their piecemeal laws don't work, they must be trying now to (gradually) eliminate ALL guns... and exposing the populace to uncontrolled assaults, rapes, and even murders by criminals, slaveowners... and by governments, as has happened time and again throughout history.

Sure, they throw up their hands in feigned horror, and protest that "nobody is trying to take away ALL your guns!", usually accompanied by insults and namecalling. But what else could they possibly be intending? They have seen as well as everyone else, that their laws don't work. Yet they keep demanding more. They are running out of plausible reasons for their demands... and that leaves only a few ominous reasons as their real goals.
Correction: Some Libs.
Don't use blanket labels and I will return the favor.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-05-2017, 04:29 PM
 
587 posts, read 305,180 times
Reputation: 489
https://crimeresearch.org/2017/01/wi...united-states/
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-05-2017, 04:31 PM
 
Location: Raleigh
8,166 posts, read 8,531,839 times
Reputation: 10147
Quote:
Originally Posted by uggabugga View Post
fine by me. kind of strange that they escaped the legal scrutiny in the first place.
they'll probably get these too.
https://www.galatiinternational.com/...ire-crank.html
I was thinking that if the device is outlawed shooting hobbyists will see the design of a new one as a challenge and have an alternative available on Amazon before the President even signs the law into effect.
"You can take my guns away when you pry my copy of 3D software out of my cold dead hands"
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-05-2017, 04:40 PM
 
Location: Lone Mountain Las Vegas NV
18,058 posts, read 10,360,489 times
Reputation: 8828
Quote:
Originally Posted by vette0009 View Post
That is Lott...a well known phony who fakes his data. No legitimate credentials.

https://thinkprogress.org/debunking-...-5456e83cf326/
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-05-2017, 04:42 PM
 
22,768 posts, read 30,745,293 times
Reputation: 14745
Quote:
Originally Posted by rbohm View Post
well then why not try to get the second amendment repealed then?
yes, that's what I've been talking about, rbohm
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-05-2017, 04:47 PM
 
Location: San Diego
18,741 posts, read 7,620,616 times
Reputation: 15011
Quote:
Originally Posted by lvmensch View Post
Utter nonsense.
TRANSLATION: I can't refute any of it, but I hate it anyway. So I'll call it names instead, and hope that somebody somewhere believes me anyway.
Quote:
You cannot win by stacking it higher and deeper.
Then why do you keep trying?

Quote:
I happen to favor the 2nd and permissive concealed carry.
Do you mean, citizens have to apply to the government for permission to carry a concealed weapon?

Chalk up one more person who thinks we are better off with government having the authority to restrict our personal weapons.

Didn't even read the OP, did we?

Quote:
the days of legal external devices are numbered.
The days of what?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-05-2017, 04:48 PM
 
Location: Arizona
13,276 posts, read 7,326,738 times
Reputation: 10112
I don't think the 2nd amendment has anything to do with any gun laws except outright bans based on nothing like we had in DC and a few city's. The Supreme court has ruled more then once that the 2nd amendment does not allow for un-limited access to firearms.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distri...mbia_v._Heller
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-05-2017, 04:57 PM
 
Location: Lone Mountain Las Vegas NV
18,058 posts, read 10,360,489 times
Reputation: 8828
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roboteer View Post
TRANSLATION: I can't refute any of it, but I hate it anyway. So I'll call it names instead, and hope that somebody somewhere believes me anyway.

Then why do you keep trying?


Do you mean, citizens have to apply to the government for permission to carry a concealed weapon?

Chalk up one more person who thinks we are better off with government having the authority to restrict our personal weapons.

Didn't even read the OP, did we?


The days of what?
With the complete lack of understanding of the roots of the second amendment and the present situation shown by your OP I would not be surprised at anything you write. When one starts from an utterly inaccurate position it is simple to expand it to other absurd views. And your post is a wonderful example of this.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-05-2017, 05:00 PM
 
Location: ATX/Houston
1,896 posts, read 812,292 times
Reputation: 515
The Founders wrote the 2nd amendment because of the time they lived in. Militias were very important on the frontier out of necessity and there was no resemblance of law enforcement in the modern sense.

I'd bet the Founders would have been appalled by what's happened with gun ownership in these modern time. I hunt and go to the range about once a month, but "gun nuts" have multiplied like rabbits lately it seems.
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
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:11 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