RE: Why would you want to chip away at the 2nd amendment instead of trying to repeal it.

RE: Why would you want to chip away at the 2nd amendment instead of trying to repeal it. (Full Version)

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

Message

BamaD -> RE: Why would you want to chip away at the 2nd amendment instead of trying to repeal it. (1/4/2015 4:49:20 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: slvemike4u This is just a waste of my time.....neither of you are interested in anything that might actually make a difference I'm not worried,the laws will change,it's the bodies that will have piled up between now and than that concerns me Yes we are, you just can't see it.

CreativeDominant -> RE: Why would you want to chip away at the 2nd amendment instead of trying to repeal it. (1/4/2015 5:03:30 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: slvemike4u This is just a waste of my time.....neither of you are interested in anything that might actually make a difference I'm not worried,the laws will change,it's the bodies that will have piled up between now and than that concerns me Anything as described by...or prescribed by...you and/or your side. See, that's the problem, Mike...your side thinks it has all the answers. Therefore, you want to be the ones offering up the laws. When someone from our side says ,"wait a minute...THAT one isn't reasonable", you want to pick up your ball and go home to mommy (the Feds) because we won't agree with EVERY law because everything your side offers IS reasonable.

Arturas -> RE: Why would you want to chip away at the 2nd amendment instead of trying to repeal it. (1/4/2015 5:07:20 PM)
Where is it written in the Constitution that we can only bear arms if we submit to a background check? Answer: no where. This "background check" is a political move to make the left think they are keeping guns out of the hands of criminals. Everyone raise their hands if they think background checks keep guns out of the hands of criminals. So, why do we care if their are background checks? Because we are supposed to have the right to bear arms in order to defend the nation from a government that becomes oppressive, such as when they chip away at the Constitution, and it is difficult to use these arms in such a legal enterprise if said oppressive government knows exactly where the legal guns are, what type of gun it is and who owns it. Duh.

BamaD -> RE: Why would you want to chip away at the 2nd amendment instead of trying to repeal it. (1/4/2015 5:09:16 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant quote: ORIGINAL: slvemike4u This is just a waste of my time.....neither of you are interested in anything that might actually make a difference I'm not worried,the laws will change,it's the bodies that will have piled up between now and than that concerns me Anything as described by...or prescribed by...you and/or your side. See, that's the problem, Mike...your side thinks it has all the answers. Therefore, you want to be the ones offering up the laws. When someone from our side says ,"wait a minute...THAT one isn't reasonable", you want to pick up your ball and go home to mommy (the Feds) because we won't agree with EVERY law because everything your side offers IS reasonable. Maybe you can tell me since he won't even acknowledge the suggestion, what is wrong with focusing on the people who misuse firearms instead of legitimate owners, unless the goal is to confiscate firearms.

Musicmystery -> RE: Why would you want to chip away at the 2nd amendment instead of trying to repeal it. (1/4/2015 5:15:43 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant See, that's the problem, Mike...your side thinks it has all the answers. And you don't?

Arturas -> RE: Why would you want to chip away at the 2nd amendment instead of trying to repeal it. (1/4/2015 5:16:40 PM)
Why do we need any more laws? What's wrong with enforcing the ones we have? What, we think if we add more laws things will get better? Maybe we think if we add some more rights we will be happier? Let's see, what right to I need. Oh yeah, the right to fast and free internet access, guaranteed under the "general welfare" right. Don't forget the free car too since we now have the right to cell phones for free, also guaranteed under the Constitution under the right to pursue happiness and I cannot be happy without my free cell phone. I know that's right. What about the right to make you who work subsidize my housing and free healthcare under the general welfare, yeah, my welfare and I get to have a free TV later to pursue my happiness. That needs an amendmend later if it makes you happy, we will calll it the flat tax amendment, we tax the working to buy my flat screen TV.

slvemike4u -> RE: Why would you want to chip away at the 2nd amendment instead of trying to repeal it. (1/4/2015 5:22:13 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Arturas Where is it written in the Constitution that we can only bear arms if we submit to a background check? Answer: no where. This "background check" is a political move to make the left think they are keeping guns out of the hands of criminals. Everyone raise their hands if they think background checks keep guns out of the hands of criminals. So, why do we care if their are background checks? Because we are supposed to have the right to bear arms in order to defend the nation from a government that becomes oppressive, such as when they chip away at the Constitution, and it is difficult to use these arms in such a legal enterprise if said oppressive government knows exactly where the legal guns are, what type of gun it is and who owns it. Duh. Bullshit to the above in its entirety. The most spurious line of reasoning so far offered.

LordIgnoble -> RE: Why would you want to chip away at the 2nd amendment instead of trying to repeal it. (1/4/2015 5:29:54 PM)
OK I probably should just leave this alone as I do not own a gun, do not like guns, and generally wish they had never been invented, but did I read correctly when someone said that it is unreasonable to ask private gun owners to by no more the one gun a month? I mean ultimately it doesn't matter. If someone is going to commit a crime with a gun, then likely the number of guns they have is irrelevant, but why would the average person even want that many guns?

BamaD -> RE: Why would you want to chip away at the 2nd amendment instead of trying to repeal it. (1/4/2015 5:40:38 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LordIgnoble OK I probably should just leave this alone as I do not own a gun, do not like guns, and generally wish they had never been invented, but did I read correctly when someone said that it is unreasonable to ask private gun owners to by no more the one gun a month? I mean ultimately it doesn't matter. If someone is going to commit a crime with a gun, then likely the number of guns they have is irrelevant, but why would the average person even want that many guns? Bird hunting, small game hunting, varmint hunting, plincking, home defense shotgun, carry gun. Need I go on? Then if they are into something like cowboy action shooting they need about six more. That said, the right not to own a gun is as implicit as the right to own one. If you want a gun to commit a crime one is quite enough, it is if you have legal uses for firearms you would most likely want more than if you are a criminal. Again you have every right not to want a gun. But I have every right to own one.

CreativeDominant -> RE: Why would you want to chip away at the 2nd amendment instead of trying to repeal it. (1/4/2015 5:40:45 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery quote: ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant See, that's the problem, Mike...your side thinks it has all the answers. And you don't? No, I don't. Nor do most responsible gun owners, which is why we've gone along with the laws that we have...as pointed out to mike (did you miss that?). But...when it comes down to one side proclaiming that their laws are the only ones reasonable...And their every single law takes away more and more rights from the other side with no compromise of theirs...then something is wrong.

LordIgnoble -> RE: Why would you want to chip away at the 2nd amendment instead of trying to repeal it. (1/4/2015 5:53:21 PM)
All of these require an individual weapon, and these guns break so frequently that people need to replace at least two a month?

BamaD -> RE: Why would you want to chip away at the 2nd amendment instead of trying to repeal it. (1/4/2015 6:10:44 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LordIgnoble All of these require an individual weapon, and these guns break so frequently that people need to replace at least two a month? Each of the uses does. No but if, for example, you have just gotten into cas you will not want to wait several months to get started so you would want to get two peacemaker class handguns, two black powder handguns, a pocket pistol, a derringer, a rifle caliber rifle, a pistol caliber rifle and a long range single shot rifle, and a coach gun (a type of shotgun) that is ten, nobody wants to spend a year gathering the tools for their game. Each type of hunting requires a different type of firearm. A home defense shotgun and a hunting shotgun are not at all the same. This limitation laws don't kick in if you buy two every month they kick in if you buy two in any month, see the difference.

stef -> RE: Why would you want to chip away at the 2nd amendment instead of trying to repeal it. (1/4/2015 6:17:31 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: slvemike4u quote: ORIGINAL: stef quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD You must be desperate resorting to the firearm as a phallic symbol garbage. It is beneath you. No, that's his default level. I'll take that as a compliment,coming from you and all that [:)] The truth hurt, Mike? If you don't want to be called on that crap maybe you should stop pulling that club out of the bag. Pretend you have another club every once in a while, if only for the sake of variety.

quizzicalkitten -> RE: Why would you want to chip away at the 2nd amendment instead of trying to repeal it. (1/4/2015 6:18:27 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LordIgnoble All of these require an individual weapon, and these guns break so frequently that people need to replace at least two a month? no, but gun shows or dealers regularly have special buys for example a local establishment had their smith and wesson sale day, one day a year they drop the prices on all smith and wesson guns dramatically. So you can save several hundred per gun, which means you can buy more then one on that day. IF you could only buy one a month, then you have to wait another whole year to get another gun at that price. On the last day of a gun show at the end of the day those who dont want to trudge their merchandise home, will do similar, with deep discounts making it a viable option to buy. Its called saving money, and most people like to do that, regardless of the items they are saving on. Theres no reason to restrict gun buying to one a month, or one a year...because most gun crimes dont happen from people who go through legal channels its why drug laws dont work, its why gun laws dont work, because Criminals dont follow the law....

LordIgnoble -> RE: Why would you want to chip away at the 2nd amendment instead of trying to repeal it. (1/4/2015 6:28:19 PM)
Okay, I can see that. BamaD, this CAS thing sounds exceedingly expensive. Do you think the average person could afford to by a full collection in a short period of time? Three or four months for example?

slvemike4u -> RE: Why would you want to chip away at the 2nd amendment instead of trying to repeal it. (1/4/2015 6:44:42 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: stef quote: ORIGINAL: slvemike4u quote: ORIGINAL: stef quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD You must be desperate resorting to the firearm as a phallic symbol garbage. It is beneath you. No, that's his default level. I'll take that as a compliment,coming from you and all that [:)] The truth hurt, Mike? If you don't want to be called on that crap maybe you should stop pulling that club out of the bag. Pretend you have another club every once in a while, if only for the sake of variety. no hurt,none at all....you mean less than squat to me,so why would anything you say hurt ?

BamaD -> RE: Why would you want to chip away at the 2nd amendment instead of trying to repeal it. (1/4/2015 6:49:16 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LordIgnoble Okay, I can see that. BamaD, this CAS thing sounds exceedingly expensive. Do you think the average person could afford to by a full collection in a short period of time? Three or four months for example? There are a lot of people in it, so I guess so. Does it matter, there are a number of legitimate reasons for purchasing one at a time. If they misuse them, that is a concern, but once again we have an idea to hit legitimate owners in the alleged hope of stopping the illegitimate ones.

LordIgnoble -> RE: Why would you want to chip away at the 2nd amendment instead of trying to repeal it. (1/4/2015 7:30:53 PM)
Just trying to understand the situation.

BamaD -> RE: Why would you want to chip away at the 2nd amendment instead of trying to repeal it. (1/4/2015 7:54:39 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LordIgnoble Just trying to understand the situation. NP

epiphiny43 -> RE: Why would you want to chip away at the 2nd amendment instead of trying to repeal it. (1/4/2015 10:58:54 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: slvemike4u quote: ORIGINAL: epiphiny43 That argument (For yet more background checks, many currently exist.) has a fatal flaw. As do most on Either side of the American gun debate. Assuming changing the various US and State gun laws on gun access will substantially change behavior on the street, or what damaged brains and minds do, shows abysmal understanding of the grey and black markets, which are huge in the US and may be greater in other countries than the official markets. You Really need to get out more? If you don't know who to go see to buy sex, illegal drugs, legal but unprescribed to You drugs or most types of guns, people on your block or where you shop most certainly do. And many are known to the police. All street people are living in the black market whether they want to or not. Anyone interested finds it quickly. For better and worse, our society is entrepreneurial far beyond the ability of legislatures and the Law to control. Ask any drug dealer, pimp or real estate developer. There is no way to do anything about underground gun sales until you address the glut of weapons available legally....see the above problem in getting a one month a gun law passed in Virginia. Is that like getting rid of illegal drug sales by addressing the glut of legal drugs? You guys Really have to get out now and then. Illegal drug sales are over $100 BILLION/year business in the US alone Abused legal drugs (illegal prescription, negligently written, falsely obtained prescription or outside legal channels) are considered a bigger industry by many. More users, for sure. I'm thinking your great idea of only one drug buy a month will fix that in a New York second? Energetic 'entrepreneurs' will supply a market, legal or not. Illegal wildlife and animal parts sales world wide are rocketing (Recently passing $40 Billion a year) as E. Asia and other markets acquire disposable income. All are illegal in all the countries the animals are poached or captured, the countries the contraband travels through and the country of sale. People get what they will pay for. Dozens of laws that were going to fix the gun problem have been proposed and passed. Some discouraging fraction of them are actually enforced, few effectively. Sooooooo. . . let's pass more? I"m with the gun guys here, let's try enforcing a few already passed laws first? My view is the gun problem Can be solved, at least for the casual emotional defective and the general gang banger, but Not for the politically or ideologically discontent like Jihadists, White Power and Survivalists, or any of the rainbow of radical leftists. It just takes a police state somewhere a bit more repressive than Hitler or Stalin to actually confiscate America's guns. Which problem do you want unsolved, sickening mass murders in the papers a few times a year or thousands to millions disappearing into concentration camps or otherwise eliminated? Every move or conversation anyone has monitored?? We suppose the somewhat rigorous police state will disband as soon as all guns are seized or destroyed? OPPS, Bulletin! 3D printing just changed all the rules! You Can't eliminate all the guns, people everywhere just print more? Current anticipation by knowledgeable technologists and marketeers have 3D printers as common in a decade as big screen TV, almost as ubiquitous as flat printers before long. Nobody even begins to understand what letting That genie out of the bottle is going to mean. The gun lobby is delusional if there are real beliefs that advancing lethal technologies, the responses to them and the abilities to monitor more of society and reality aren't going to erode past 'rights'. The anti-gun lobby is delusional if they really believe a participative democracy/Republic and any sort of individual freedoms will survive actually effective gun controls in the US. So I expect the useless debate to continue till some transformative event changes the environment in which most assumptions are based and argued from. An educational system that produces far more educated, ethical and empathetic citizens (Mench?) would be my choice. (Republicans would be laughed out of existence, few could stomach Dems) But too many parents would object to someone interfering with their right to screw up the kids their own way?

Page: << < prev 10 11 [12] 13 14 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875