RE: ***Unmoderated Gun rights debate - Self Defense to 2nd Amendment ***

RE: ***Unmoderated Gun rights debate - Self Defense to 2nd Amendment *** (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

Nosathro -> RE: *Unmoderated Gun rights debate - Self Defense to 2nd Amendment * (9/28/2013 10:47:39 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic I'm betting it's cleaner than air making it through your tinfoil filters, Nosathro. I can read you lost your argument, even before you spoke.

BamaD -> RE: *Unmoderated Gun rights debate - Self Defense to 2nd Amendment * (9/28/2013 10:49:55 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Nosathro quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic I'm betting it's cleaner than air making it through your tinfoil filters, Nosathro. I can read you lost your argument, even before you spoke. You truly enjoy your self delusion don't you?

tj444 -> RE: *Unmoderated Gun rights debate - Self Defense to 2nd Amendment * (9/28/2013 11:15:38 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD Don't want to derail my own thread but it basically sounds like we're not good enough for you. why are you trying to make it personal? its not a matter of "you're not good enough for me".. its a matter of trying to find a better fit with my societal view(s).. I don't take offense to those Americans that call Canada "socialist"! or those that are aghast at not being able to travel in Canada without a gun on their person.. I know that certain Americans wouldn't like it there or fit in/adapt.. its no skin off my nose tho.. to each his/her own, right?

TheHeretic -> RE: *Unmoderated Gun rights debate - Self Defense to 2nd Amendment * (9/28/2013 11:25:20 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Nosathro quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic I'm betting it's cleaner than air making it through your tinfoil filters, Nosathro. I can read you lost your argument, even before you spoke. I'm sorry. Did you somehow get the impression I was giving you enough credence to bother to argue with you, or the steaming pile of bullshit you tried putting on the table? That was a dismissal. Enjoy your day.

BamaD -> RE: *Unmoderated Gun rights debate - Self Defense to 2nd Amendment * (9/28/2013 11:33:37 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tj444 quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD Don't want to derail my own thread but it basically sounds like we're not good enough for you. why are you trying to make it personal? its not a matter of "you're not good enough for me".. its a matter of trying to find a better fit with my societal view(s).. I don't take offense to those Americans that call Canada "socialist"! or those that are aghast at not being able to travel in Canada without a gun on their person.. I know that certain Americans wouldn't like it there or fit in/adapt.. its no skin off my nose tho.. to each his/her own, right? Yep

Hillwilliam -> RE: *Unmoderated Gun rights debate - Self Defense to 2nd Amendment * (9/28/2013 2:07:00 PM)
Maybe those who wish to read left wing nutcases claiming that the second amendment was meant to protect something that wasn't even particularly controversial at the time should read Federalist paper #46. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federalist_No._46

DesideriScuri -> RE: *Unmoderated Gun rights debate - Self Defense to 2nd Amendment * (9/28/2013 2:42:02 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam Maybe those who wish to read left wing nutcases claiming that the second amendment was meant to protect something that wasn't even particularly controversial at the time should read Federalist paper #46. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federalist_No._46 "left wing?"

metamorfosis -> RE: *Unmoderated Gun rights debate - Self Defense to 2nd Amendment * (9/28/2013 3:04:38 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri "left wing?" Hillwilliam's link supports the idea that the founding fathers meant to protect an individual's right to bear arms, instead of granting that right exclusively to the militia. So, yes. He is attempting to refute claims to the contrary by the left wing.

TheHeretic -> RE: *Unmoderated Gun rights debate - Self Defense to 2nd Amendment * (9/28/2013 3:08:23 PM)
How about if we just go with "nutcases," and skip trying to determine what rational branches of political thought they might share some commonality with? Besides, gun ownership and concern for firearm rights does not cleanly fit into the normal partisan boxes

DesideriScuri -> RE: *Unmoderated Gun rights debate - Self Defense to 2nd Amendment * (9/28/2013 3:15:12 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: metamorfosis quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri "left wing?" Hillwilliam's link supports the idea that the founding fathers meant to protect an individual's right to bear arms, instead of granting that right exclusively to the militia. So, yes. He is attempting to refute claims to the contrary by the left wing. I stand by my question. The way it reads, he's inviting people to read what "left wing nutcases" wrote about the 2nd Amendment in the Federalist #46. That is, he was referring to Madison, et. al., as "left wing nutcases," which I certainly don't agree with.

metamorfosis -> RE: *Unmoderated Gun rights debate - Self Defense to 2nd Amendment * (9/28/2013 3:16:55 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri I stand by my question. The way it reads, he's inviting people to read what "left wing nutcases" wrote about the 2nd Amendment in the Federalist #46. That is, he was referring to Madison, et. al., as "left wing nutcases," which I certainly don't agree with. Okay, it does read that way.

Hillwilliam -> RE: *Unmoderated Gun rights debate - Self Defense to 2nd Amendment * (9/28/2013 4:50:38 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: metamorfosis quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri "left wing?" Hillwilliam's link supports the idea that the founding fathers meant to protect an individual's right to bear arms, instead of granting that right exclusively to the militia. So, yes. He is attempting to refute claims to the contrary by the left wing. I stand by my question. The way it reads, he's inviting people to read what "left wing nutcases" wrote about the 2nd Amendment in the Federalist #46. That is, he was referring to Madison, et. al., as "left wing nutcases," which I certainly don't agree with. I was referring to those earlier in the thread who insist that Amendment 2 was to appease the southern slave states. Until the 1780s, however, ALL states were slave states.

TheHeretic -> RE: *Unmoderated Gun rights debate - Self Defense to 2nd Amendment * (9/29/2013 10:03:47 AM)
Imported from another thread, discussing a family tragedy, and some thugs with badges. quote: ORIGINAL: DaNewAgeViking This smells of some gun-sociopath going off on the cops. Now here we have a charming example of why firearms discussion is so difficult. "Gun-sociopath." According to popular statistics, 80 million Americans own guns. Is that, in itself, a determining factor of mental illness? DNAV is perfectly happy, at least on a thread where his shit can hide from appropriate response, to fling a slur at anyone who dares to disagree with his brainwashing and bullshit. He's perfectly happy to take a tragedy, and use a dead teenage girl as a club to push his ideological POV. (Of course, the whiners will go whining, when someone takes a mass murder that involves a different tool than firearms, and shoves the tactic back in their faces, but hopefully that won't be an issue here.) People will point out that guns are a more effective means of suicide than pills, but they will happily ignore the even higher success rate of jumping from high places, or stepping in front of a train.

GotSteel -> RE: *Unmoderated Gun rights debate - Self Defense to 2nd Amendment * (9/29/2013 12:10:27 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tj444 I didn't "forget" about anyone.. I was just pointing out that the US govt doesn't actually do much to keep "weapons out the hands of unstable" nutbars.. Oh it's worse than that, Georgia Republicans have a bill to undermine existing mental health prohibitions and put guns back in the hands of unstable nutbars. http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/03/07/georgia-republican-proposes-relaxing-gun-restrictions-on-mentally-ill/

DsBound -> RE: *Unmoderated Gun rights debate - Self Defense to 2nd Amendment * (9/29/2013 1:02:10 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: GotSteel quote: ORIGINAL: tj444 I didn't "forget" about anyone.. I was just pointing out that the US govt doesn't actually do much to keep "weapons out the hands of unstable" nutbars.. Oh it's worse than that, Georgia Republicans have a bill to undermine existing mental health prohibitions and put guns back in the hands of unstable nutbars. http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/03/07/georgia-republican-proposes-relaxing-gun-restrictions-on-mentally-ill/ I think thats misrepresenting the bill. If you read the attached pdf of HB512, you'll see that among the things they want are no fingerprints for renewals, which seems reasonable. People that have been involuntarily hospitalized, would still have restrictions. This article is slanted for sure.

GotSteel -> RE: *Unmoderated Gun rights debate - Self Defense to 2nd Amendment * (9/29/2013 2:23:54 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DsBound quote: ORIGINAL: GotSteel Oh it's worse than that, Georgia Republicans have a bill to undermine existing mental health prohibitions and put guns back in the hands of unstable nutbars. http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/03/07/georgia-republican-proposes-relaxing-gun-restrictions-on-mentally-ill/ I think thats misrepresenting the bill. If you read the attached pdf of HB512, you'll see that among the things they want are no fingerprints for renewals, which seems reasonable. People that have been involuntarily hospitalized, would still have restrictions. This article is slanted for sure. I'm not claiming that every idea in the bill is unreasonable just it's arm the unstable nutbars provision. If we keep denying the mentally ill care (good job republicans) and arming them (thanks republican) then we can predictably look forward to more crazed shooting sprees.

MasterCaneman -> RE: *Unmoderated Gun rights debate - Self Defense to 2nd Amendment * (9/29/2013 2:32:44 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: GotSteel quote: ORIGINAL: DsBound quote: ORIGINAL: GotSteel Oh it's worse than that, Georgia Republicans have a bill to undermine existing mental health prohibitions and put guns back in the hands of unstable nutbars. http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/03/07/georgia-republican-proposes-relaxing-gun-restrictions-on-mentally-ill/ I think thats misrepresenting the bill. If you read the attached pdf of HB512, you'll see that among the things they want are no fingerprints for renewals, which seems reasonable. People that have been involuntarily hospitalized, would still have restrictions. This article is slanted for sure. I'm not claiming that every idea in the bill is unreasonable just it's arm the unstable nutbars provision. If we keep denying the mentally ill care (good job republicans) and arming them (thanks republican) then we can predictably look forward to more crazed shooting sprees. Proof, please. I'm not a Republican by a long shot, but I'll be damned and assigned to hell having mine taken away on technicalities. Show me the proof.

Kirata -> RE: *Unmoderated Gun rights debate - Self Defense to 2nd Amendment * (9/29/2013 3:24:07 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: GotSteel I'm not claiming that every idea in the bill is unreasonable just it's arm the unstable nutbars provision. (2) No weapons carry license shall be issued to... (J) Any person who has been involuntarily hospitalized as an inpatient in any mental hospital or alcohol or drug treatment center or adjudicated by a court to be in need of involuntary outpatient mental health treatment within the five years immediately preceding the application... HB 512 K.

DsBound -> RE: *Unmoderated Gun rights debate - Self Defense to 2nd Amendment * (9/29/2013 4:13:51 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: GotSteel I'm not claiming that every idea in the bill is unreasonable just it's arm the unstable nutbars provision. (2) No weapons carry license shall be issued to... (J) Any person who has been involuntarily hospitalized as an inpatient in any mental hospital or alcohol or drug treatment center or adjudicated by a court to be in need of involuntary outpatient mental health treatment within the five years immediately preceding the application... HB 512 K. ^^^^Thank you. In theory, that should cover the "nut jobs", as you put it. Will there be unstable people that slip through cracks, probably... sadly, there are so many gun laws on the books that we should live in a crime free nation. However, there are people that choose, for whatever reason, to violate the rights of others and those people are determined, non life respecting individuals. No amount of laws are going to change that.

BamaD -> RE: *Unmoderated Gun rights debate - Self Defense to 2nd Amendment * (9/29/2013 4:20:20 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: GotSteel I'm not claiming that every idea in the bill is unreasonable just it's arm the unstable nutbars provision. (2) No weapons carry license shall be issued to... (J) Any person who has been involuntarily hospitalized as an inpatient in any mental hospital or alcohol or drug treatment center or adjudicated by a court to be in need of involuntary outpatient mental health treatment within the five years immediately preceding the application... HB 512 K. Yes but it doesn't say that the desire to own or carry a firearm is proof of instability.

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3] 4 5 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625