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 06-10-2022, 05:09 AM
 
Location: the very edge of the continent
89,033 posts, read 44,853,831 times
Reputation: 13716

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by NVplumber View Post
The whole "fiearms are pouring in from neighboring states with less restrictive laws" bit is just way old man. In order to buy a firearm in a neighboring state where one does not live and actually taking the firearm with them when they head home just does NOT happen. They can indeed purchase the firearm providing they pass the NCIC background check but then the piece must be shipped to an FFL holder in the persons state of residence and the process repeated.

And if the purchaser lives in a municipality that requires other hoops be jumped through such as Chicago or NYC the receiving dealer must see to it all those municipal restrictions are followed. NYC and Chicago both require a license to own a firearm and they also require registration and a 30 day waiting period I do believe. Do you honestly believe that complete and utter bilge that "guns are pouring in from neighboring states with less restrictive laws" pile of reeking bovine excrement?
Of course they do because the mindless sheeple have been TOLD to believe that and having little to no cognitive ability... they do.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-10-2022, 05:48 AM
 
78,432 posts, read 60,628,324 times
Reputation: 49733
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roboteer View Post
The Democrats ar once again pushing the same failed "solutions" today (restrict or ban certain guns, waiting periods, even restricting ammo), that they have tried for years, and the murder rate has never gone down.

You'd think they'd finally take the hint, and try some of the things that have been shown to work. They are even legal, i.e. they don't violate the 2nd amendment.
Right, but you're missing an angle and while this thread is over a year old, I've seen similar topics for decades.

The "angle" is that they have NOT tried for years, they've talked about it and grandstanded but really for the most part just use it as a political issue.

Also, actually the murder rate has gone down over the years despite the guns. It just recently spiked again, despite all the guns remaining unchanged.

That tells everyone that there are social issues strongly at play and we can change these outcomes in other ways without disarming law biding citizenry.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-10-2022, 06:10 AM
 
8,382 posts, read 4,371,285 times
Reputation: 11890
The 2nd is one of the most interpreted amendments. All it says is ..


"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."


No where does it say anything about age, gender, weight, caliber, size, rate of fire or magazines. There are already arms restrictions implemented by Congress. Machine guns have been regulated at the federal level since the 1930s, and the manufacture or importation of new machine guns for sale to civilians has been banned since 1986. Civilians can not buy military grade arms such as rocket launchers, hand grenades and a lot more.


With that precedence, it is reasonable that Congress could further limit arms in any one of a number of ways without infringing on the right of people to keep and bear (less deadly) arms or changing the 2nd amendment.


The only question is will conservatives prioritize the safety of American citizens (and children) above greed and power.


Of course all this is not in the conservative interest of trying to increase hate for democrats either.

Last edited by ditchoc; 06-10-2022 at 06:39 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-10-2022, 06:22 AM
 
Location: East Lansing, MI
28,353 posts, read 16,389,243 times
Reputation: 10467
Restrictions to the 2A have already been deemed constitutional - no need to amend anything, but you knew that.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-10-2022, 06:33 AM
 
28,122 posts, read 12,608,522 times
Reputation: 15341
I wouldnt worry about any restrictions or laws they pass on guns...they havent been effective and new ones will not be any different...I say let them try!


If they go to far, citizens have the numbers to stop them anyway. Besides that, what cop is going to enforce these kinds of laws on their neighbors, friends, family? LOL
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-10-2022, 06:33 AM
 
Location: the very edge of the continent
89,033 posts, read 44,853,831 times
Reputation: 13716
Quote:
Originally Posted by hooligan View Post
Restrictions to the 2A have already been deemed constitutional - no need to amend anything, but you knew that.
It depends... Heller struck down DC's attempt at restrictions, a move in the direction of actually abiding by the US Constitution.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-10-2022, 07:30 AM
 
Location: Just over the horizon
18,461 posts, read 7,094,796 times
Reputation: 11707
Quote:
Originally Posted by ditchoc View Post
The 2nd is one of the most interpreted amendments. All it says is ..


"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."


No where does it say anything about age, gender, weight, caliber, size, rate of fire or magazines. There are already arms restrictions implemented by Congress. Machine guns have been regulated at the federal level since the 1930s, and the manufacture or importation of new machine guns for sale to civilians has been banned since 1986. Civilians can not buy military grade arms such as rocket launchers, hand grenades and a lot more.


With that precedence, it is reasonable that Congress could further limit arms in any one of a number of ways without infringing on the right of people to keep and bear (less deadly) arms or changing the 2nd amendment.


The only question is will conservatives prioritize the safety of American citizens (and children) above greed and power.


Of course all this is not in the conservative interest of trying to increase hate for democrats either.



And much to the surprise/dismay of the gun grabbing Left..... semiautomatics such as the AR-15 are not "military grade" weapons.

No matter what they look like.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-10-2022, 07:49 AM
 
8,382 posts, read 4,371,285 times
Reputation: 11890
Quote:
Originally Posted by FatBob96 View Post
And much to the surprise/dismay of the gun grabbing Left..... semiautomatics such as the AR-15 are not "military grade" weapons.

No matter what they look like.



Pure semantics ... the only thing missing is full auto. Add a bump stock and there is not much difference in fire power. Add a 50 or 100 round drum magazine and you have more firepower than most 'military grade assault rifles'.



A bump stock can achieve up to 600 rounds a minute or 10 per second. About the only limiting factor is your pocket book. At about 60 cents per NATO round x 100 rounds at that fire rate you can burn 60 bucks in 10 seconds.


Short of a 'thrill' on a firing range under controlled conditions, what civilian actually needs that kind of fire power.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-10-2022, 08:10 AM
 
Location: Philadelphia, PA
4,507 posts, read 4,047,324 times
Reputation: 3087
Federal gun infringements are not only a violation of the 2nd but they are a violation of the 10th.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-10-2022, 08:12 AM
 
Location: Philadelphia, PA
4,507 posts, read 4,047,324 times
Reputation: 3087
Quote:
Originally Posted by ditchoc View Post
Short of a 'thrill' on a firing range under controlled conditions, what civilian actually needs that kind of fire power.
What “civilian” needs a coat when it is currently summer? Ban all coats of course.
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 08:00 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