RE: Supreme Court strikes down handgun ban

RE: Supreme Court strikes down handgun ban (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

Thadius -> RE: Supreme Court strikes down handgun ban (6/26/2008 1:32:46 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: slvemike4u Again with the Gun Banning thing...please someone point out one post on this thread that advocated or called for a complete ban on all guns.This is a favored tactic of the gun crowd,when someone starts talking about common sense laws,they do a bait and switch on the whole conversation .... Which guns would you not ban? I have seen the term "assault weapons" thrown around quite a bit, would you clarify what you consider to be an assault weapon? Does it include automatics and semiautomatics, does it extend to bolt action rifles, or just the size of of clip or magazine that the weapon is capable of using? I have no issues with people wanting more training, safety (features and storage), or even background checks, I do however raise an eyebrow when somebody uses such a broad term that is not defined like "assault weapons".

Leatherist -> RE: Supreme Court strikes down handgun ban (6/26/2008 1:34:37 PM)
Nice,I better start saving up for my 50 cal browning chain fed. [:D] http://www.usarmymodels.com/WEAPONS/30calMG.jpg (it's for shooting stray cats-honest)

Thadius -> RE: Supreme Court strikes down handgun ban (6/26/2008 1:39:58 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Leatherist Nice,I better start saving up for my 50 cal browning chain fed. [:D] http://www.usarmymodels.com/WEAPONS/30calMG.jpg (it's for shooting stray cats-honest) I think the mortar shells in the background would be more effective for stray cats... those little bastards are quick. [8D]

cyberdude611 -> RE: Supreme Court strikes down handgun ban (6/26/2008 1:42:34 PM)
Didnt the Nazis also favor gun control? As did the Soviets and every other totalitarian regime. Gun control seems to have a lot to do with big government, loss of freedom, and more control over the people. And the gun control lobby and their supporters are the same way in the US today.

variation30 -> RE: Supreme Court strikes down handgun ban (6/26/2008 1:43:46 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: CyberDom08 Down here, when the hurricanes hit, there was lawlessness, looting and a breakdown of the "system". I have a shot gun that I prefer to use but your weapon of choice is your own. You can bet that in cases of emergency, there will be people out there, stealing, raping and killing, are we forgetting New Orleans in Katrina??? and in the middle of all that stress and danger, the government declares matial law (though they really didn't) and confiscates your guns! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5lfEm66Bp_U

Leatherist -> RE: Supreme Court strikes down handgun ban (6/26/2008 1:43:58 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Thadius quote: ORIGINAL: Leatherist Nice,I better start saving up for my 50 cal browning chain fed. [:D] http://www.usarmymodels.com/WEAPONS/30calMG.jpg (it's for shooting stray cats-honest) I think the mortar shells in the background would be more effective for stray cats... those little bastards are quick. [8D] These work well too. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BMYnWTd8v8M http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jZYh5IFUqmw&feature=related http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N7ELhy4_0hM

variation30 -> RE: Supreme Court strikes down handgun ban (6/26/2008 1:47:46 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Leatherist Nice,I better start saving up for my 50 cal browning chain fed. [:D] http://www.usarmymodels.com/WEAPONS/30calMG.jpg (it's for shooting stray cats-honest) http://world.guns.ru/assault/sa80-l85a2.jpg mmmmm mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

Thadius -> RE: Supreme Court strikes down handgun ban (6/26/2008 1:53:31 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Leatherist These work well too. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BMYnWTd8v8M http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jZYh5IFUqmw&feature=related http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N7ELhy4_0hM Are those available on Ebay or Amazon? [:D] Back on topic for a moment... I think it was Cyberdude that asked if the Nazis used gun conrol.... Actually, many countries outlawed the private ownership of firearms after WWI, which could be argued allowed a much easier march through countries such as Poland.

variation30 -> RE: Supreme Court strikes down handgun ban (6/26/2008 2:08:51 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Thadius Are those available on Ebay or Amazon? [:D] Back on topic for a moment... I think it was Cyberdude that asked if the Nazis used gun conrol.... Actually, many countries outlawed the private ownership of firearms after WWI, which could be argued allowed a much easier march through countries such as Poland. here's a fun quote: "You cannot invade the mainland United States. There would be a rifle behind every blade of grass" - Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto

Thadius -> RE: Supreme Court strikes down handgun ban (6/26/2008 2:12:50 PM)
Excellent quote, thanks for sharing that. It also something I am quite proud to say I contribute to in this day and age. There is no way anybody could invade the mainland US, because there are still those of us that are willing to defend her.

slaveboyforyou -> RE: Supreme Court strikes down handgun ban (6/26/2008 2:13:24 PM)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fbHH5xZcVvQ

slvemike4u -> RE: Supreme Court strikes down handgun ban (6/26/2008 2:19:19 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: cyberdude611 Didnt the Nazis also favor gun control? As did the Soviets and every other totalitarian regime. Gun control seems to have a lot to do with big government, loss of freedom, and more control over the people. And the gun control lobby and their supporters are the same way in the US today. Are You suggesting a belief in the need for some gun control laws is akin to a desire for totalitarian government.Nice how some advocates of unfettered gun ownership can keep ther prospective when discussing this issue

jlf1961 -> RE: Supreme Court strikes down handgun ban (6/26/2008 2:19:31 PM)
Well, Yamamoto did have a grasp of the realities of the people of the United States. The simple fact is, the founding fathers granted the people the right to keep and bear arms, and that right shall not be infringed. Congress cannot pass a law banning firearms, they would first have to repeal the second amendment, which has about as much chance of happening as Bush being honest. Whether or not you like the fact that private citizens can own firearms is beside the point, the constitution grants us the right. A president can declare martial law, make a mandatory presidential order to confiscate all firearms, and at that very moment, he is in violation of the constitution, and as per the oath, "defend the constitution against all enemies, foreign and domistic," which every soldier takes, the presidents orders are no longer legally binding. Besides, as soon as he tries, all hell will break loose in this country.

slvemike4u -> RE: Supreme Court strikes down handgun ban (6/26/2008 2:21:49 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: variation30 quote: ORIGINAL: CyberDom08 Down here, when the hurricanes hit, there was lawlessness, looting and a breakdown of the "system". I have a shot gun that I prefer to use but your weapon of choice is your own. You can bet that in cases of emergency, there will be people out there, stealing, raping and killing, are we forgetting New Orleans in Katrina??? and in the middle of all that stress and danger, the government declares matial law (though they really didn't) and confiscates your guns! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5lfEm66Bp_U Yeah they were having trouble finding rescue workers who didn't mind getting shot at...go figure

Leatherist -> RE: Supreme Court strikes down handgun ban (6/26/2008 2:23:40 PM)
One of the reasons the second amendment was crafted was to keep an armed militia. And it was seen as much as a defense against tyranny as in defending the country. And keeping the country FOR the people-rather than a usurping hunta. Because the citizens of this country would hunt them down like dogs if they tried to institute it. And I think that is a GOOD thing.

DomKen -> RE: Supreme Court strikes down handgun ban (6/26/2008 2:33:08 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: variation30 quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen I'm sorry but I don't see it. If the right can be taken away by a judge then it can certainly be limited by a legislature. It even makes clear that what type of firearms are allowed is still under the purview of the legislatures. this whole topic is making me ill. judges don't have the power to take away a right. nor do legistlatures. our rights are not granted by the constitution, they are protected by it. jesus christ people, read some of the debates around the constitutional congress or the federalist/anti-federalist papers. even hamilton was against putting the right to free press in the constitution. he did so not because he wanted the government to control the press, he did so because a glance at the constitution would easily tell you that the government does not have the power to limit the press, or free speech, or what property you can own. Complain all you want. the fact is Scalia the most extreme right winger on the court wrote this decision and he said quite clearly that he doesn't believe equal protection includes this right. I think he split hairs in an absolutely absurd and indefensible way but he did it. quote: but this is all covered under the question, does anyone (including the government) have any authority to tell me what I can and cannot do with my wealth and property? Yes, we as a society have a right to protect the whole of society from your irresponsible behavior. You cannot for instance pollute the ground on your real property in such a way that the ground water others rely upon for drinking water becomes polluted. You also cannot fire your weapon, your property, on your land, your real property, in such a way that others are are at serious risk of injury. IOW words your rights end at other people's noses.

FatDomDaddy -> RE: Supreme Court strikes down handgun ban (6/26/2008 3:24:50 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kittinSol I take it you don't think the founding fathers were liberals themselves then? Because by today's standards, they would be considered to be radical left-wingers. Really... They were pro death penalty and the list of capital crimes in 1789 was far longer than it is today, They were opposed to abortion. They were Christian They were for one man and one woman marriage They were for the most part pro chattle slavery They were anti Europe Pro Business White, male property owner voters only Believed in State's Rights Shall I go on???

kittinSol -> RE: Supreme Court strikes down handgun ban (6/26/2008 3:27:35 PM)
Two words: historical context.

Alumbrado -> RE: Supreme Court strikes down handgun ban (6/26/2008 4:36:30 PM)
Simply freaking hilarious... the same bunch of Constitutional 'experts' who wasted post after post, in thread after thread, regurgitating the 'It only applies to the National Guard and muskets' or 'When they said the people, they really meant the state government', or 'It means that there should never be any limits period' sound bites in lieu of facts, are now twisting themselves into contortions to deny a clear cut affirmation that the 2nd amendment means exactly what it says. Get over it... reality wins.... you lose....again. (Pssssttt!!! Maybe if someone reports the Supreme Court to the mods, and claim that they were 'abused' by disagreement, they will reverse this decision...)[:D]

DomKen -> RE: Supreme Court strikes down handgun ban (6/26/2008 4:38:04 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FatDomDaddy Really... They were pro death penalty and the list of capital crimes in 1789 was far longer than it is today, One capital crime is enshrined in the US Constitution and the ban non cruel and unusual punishment is in the Bill of Rights. So not so clear cut. quote: They were opposed to abortion. No evidence of this exists. It's a right wing lie I've researched extensively. quote: They were Christian No. A majority could be described as deists, not strictly schristians, but the primary writers of the Constitution were even less religious than that. quote: They were for one man and one woman marriage Another claim for which little direct evidence exists. quote: They were for the most part pro chattle slavery The majority did oppose slavery but were unwilling to split the nation over it. quote: They were anti Europe Flat out lie. The french had just helped us gain our freedom and their revolutionm was very popular in the US. The US did fund Napoleon's wars by buying Louisiana from him. quote: Pro Business They hated banks and big businesses. "Banking establishments are more dangerous than standing armies." - Thomas Jefferson (Letter to John Taylor May 28, 1816) quote: White, male property owner voters only This one was pretty far from unanimous as well quote: Believed in State's Rights Never heard of the Federalists I guess. quote: Shall I go on??? Considering that not one of your claims was accurate I hope you do. It's fun catching right wingers in lies.

Page: << < prev 5 6 [7] 8 9 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.03125