Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: How long after a ban will criminals still have firearms.


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: How long after a ban will criminals still have firearms. Page: <<   < prev  10 11 [12] 13 14   next >   >>
[Poll]

How long after a ban will criminals still have firearms.


30 days
  5% (1)
1 year
  0% (0)
2-5 years
  5% (1)
6-10 years
  0% (0)
more than ten years
  88% (16)


Total Votes : 18
(last vote on : 10/31/2016 2:01:17 PM)
(Poll will run till: -- )
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: How long after a ban will criminals still have fire... - 10/23/2016 5:22:28 PM   
BamaD


Posts: 20687
Joined: 2/27/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1


quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx


ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1


Most think it was for protection from an overreaching government.

Think about this, When in the history of amerika has the private possession of guns done anything to preventg the overeach of government?

It hasn't and it wouldn't in today's world.
And that's my point.
It's an outdated law that is no longer fit for purpose.

Laws are supposed to evolve with the times to benefit the people.
This one law seems to be held back by the people and demonstrates that the people are wrong in trying to defend it.
The stats across all OECD countries are proving that every year.


You don't understand our government the 2nd isn't a law.
You also don't understand that our society is are at the crossroads, between South America , and Europe and should be judged accordingly. You blindly assume that the U S society is the same as European society and that assumption is stupid.

_____________________________

Government ranges from a necessary evil to an intolerable one. Thomas Paine

People don't believe they can defend themselves because they have guns, they have guns because they believe they can defend themselves.

(in reply to freedomdwarf1)
Profile   Post #: 221
RE: How long after a ban will criminals still have fire... - 10/23/2016 5:33:09 PM   
thompsonx


Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline 		ORIGINAL: tamaka

There is such a thing as the spirit of the law... much of the point of the 2nd ammendment, i think, is the spirit of the law.


I have just shown you what the spirit of the 2nd ammendment was so please save your flag waving for the nra rally


The spirit being that ultimately, the right of the people to protect their free nation... a nation that was purposely formed of the people, for the people (not for the corporations, the 1%, or the likes, and by the people.

Get a grip son and read some history that was not written for a fifth grader. The 1% is exactly who the constitution was written for. Why do you think we have the 17th ammendment? When the constituion was written senators were appointed so that we commoners had no say. The problem came when they were so wrapped up with internacine conflict that many senatoral seats were vacant and a quorum could not be reached so government stoped.




The 2nd Ammendment was put there to solidify that spirit.


It has been shown that the only reason for the 2nd ammendment was to preserve slavery. The militias kept meticulous records and they are availabel for anyone who wishes to peruse them. Job one of the militia was hunting down runaway slaves and searching slave quarters for contraband.


It is very much an integral part of the culture which the founding fathers weaved into the very fabric of our country.


Woven into the myth and not the fact


Perhaps we wouldn't have enough ammo... but we wouldn't go down without a fight.


Think about that for a moment. A thousand armed cops come to your house and tell you to come out with your hands up. Tell me you are gonna duke it out with them john wayne style????yeah right



That is the spirit that some of us old enough to remember our grandparents and great grandparents taught us.


The difference between a fairy tale and a war story is that a fairy tale starts with "once upon a time" a war story starts with "now this is no shit"


Those were the days when we pledged allegiance to the flag and sang patriotic songs. We were not pledging loyalty to the crown... we were pledging loyalty to ourselves and each other.

Grow the phoque up

(in reply to tamaka)
Profile   Post #: 222
RE: How long after a ban will criminals still have fire... - 10/23/2016 5:36:00 PM   
BamaD


Posts: 20687
Joined: 2/27/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1


quote:

ORIGINAL: tamaka


quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1


quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
And you fail to see any societal difference that doesn't fit your world view .

The only societal difference I see is some gun nuts not wanting to learn anything from the other countries.
The original purpose of the 2nd is no longer valid; either from a slavery or a protection from government PoV.
Yet gun nuts don't want to acknowledge that simple fact.



The original purpose is no longer valid? Omg... well i know i'm not the brightest lightbulb in the factory on these issues but that is perhaps the most stupid thing even i have ever read.


Perhaps you ought to think about why the 2nd was written in the first place.
Some think it was for the protection from the slaves.
Most think it was for protection from an overreaching government.

Whichever camp you're in, it is no longer relevant or fit for purpose.
So why cling to it??


John Wilkes Booth mean anything to you?

_____________________________

Government ranges from a necessary evil to an intolerable one. Thomas Paine

People don't believe they can defend themselves because they have guns, they have guns because they believe they can defend themselves.

(in reply to freedomdwarf1)
Profile   Post #: 223
RE: How long after a ban will criminals still have fire... - 10/23/2016 5:41:59 PM   
BamaD


Posts: 20687
Joined: 2/27/2005
Status: offline 		FD

Do you refuse to say how long criminals will still have guns after you get your Utopia because you don't think that admitting that it would take at least a generation do it might let people know what a stupid fantasy you have?
What if we get the same results are the same as in DC where murders with guns staid the same but overall murders doubled, so that even if you magically ended all gun deaths you still have the same number of murders you always had that the government would give back or replace all the guns they had stolen from the people?

_____________________________

Government ranges from a necessary evil to an intolerable one. Thomas Paine

People don't believe they can defend themselves because they have guns, they have guns because they believe they can defend themselves.

(in reply to BamaD)
Profile   Post #: 224
RE: How long after a ban will criminals still have fire... - 10/23/2016 5:43:30 PM   
thompsonx


Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline
ORIGINAL: BamaD



You don't understand our government the 2nd isn't a law.

It is you who does not understand our government. The constitution is the supreme law of amerika. Don't they teach that at the university of dumbass?




You also don't understand that our society is are at the crossroads, between South America , and Europe and should be judged accordingly.



Where do you get this shit? Crossroads???what the phoque is that suppose to mean? Europe is a continent with more than a dozen soverign nations and south amerika is a continent with more than a dozen soveign nations.You speak as if you thought they were one entity.
No wonder we think you are phoquing stupid.


You blindly assume that the U S society is the same as European society and that assumption is stupid.

Actually that is your assumption and you are right it is phoquing stupid.

(in reply to BamaD)
Profile   Post #: 225
RE: How long after a ban will criminals still have fire... - 10/23/2016 6:43:22 PM   
BamaD


Posts: 20687
Joined: 2/27/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD


quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1


quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx


ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1


Most think it was for protection from an overreaching government.

Think about this, When in the history of amerika has the private possession of guns done anything to preventg the overeach of government?

It hasn't and it wouldn't in today's world.
And that's my point.
It's an outdated law that is no longer fit for purpose.

Laws are supposed to evolve with the times to benefit the people.
This one law seems to be held back by the people and demonstrates that the people are wrong in trying to defend it.
The stats across all OECD countries are proving that every year.


You don't understand our government the 2nd isn't a law.
You also don't understand that our society is are at the crossroads, between South America , and Europe and should be judged accordingly. You blindly assume that the U S society is the same as European society and that assumption is stupid.

Allow me to elaborate,
A the 2nd is not a law, it is part of the operating system that the law operates under.
B by being "at the crossroads of European and Hispanic society I mean that our society as influences from both and that or society cannot be judged by either. Due to the European influence it is to easy to congratulate our selves and accept high crime rate, thus precluding progress.
Being judged as a purely European society is to ignore the reality of the type of mixed society we have with influences from far more violent societies and creating a feeling of helplessness in dealing with violence.
C If your view is stupid needs clarifying you are beyond hope.

_____________________________

Government ranges from a necessary evil to an intolerable one. Thomas Paine

People don't believe they can defend themselves because they have guns, they have guns because they believe they can defend themselves.

(in reply to BamaD)
Profile   Post #: 226
RE: How long after a ban will criminals still have fire... - 10/23/2016 6:56:52 PM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline 		Uh, no welfare patient we are not at no crossroads to south america, you couldnt draw a map of it, and we arent traveling in every direction from and to, nor are we culturally intertwined. After that bit of asswipe, the rest is wholly asswipe.

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to BamaD)
Profile   Post #: 227
RE: How long after a ban will criminals still have fire... - 10/23/2016 6:59:35 PM   
bounty44


Posts: 6374
Joined: 11/1/2014
Status: offline
quote:

Laws are supposed to evolve with the times to benefit the people.


that right there is a hallmark difference between liberals, who more or less believe what you just said, and conservatives, who more or less believe that certain laws are timeless and the nature of the latter are the ones that protect our liberty.

interestingly enough, I am right this minute reading a chapter in Charles cooke's (one of your countrymen) book "conservatarianism" on guns.

the chapter is called "guns: a study in success."

I think you might locate yourself in the section im about to quote. its cooke commenting on a bbc reporter sent to cover the shooting at Virginia tech a handful of years ago, and how chagrined he (the reporter) was when he kept finding people he was interviewing, lamenting the strict gun laws that prevented THEM from putting an early end to the carnage:

"spluttering and blinking, and trying as hard as he could to shake off everything he thought he knew, he made a valiant effort to grasp his interviewees' positions. but it was no good. for him, as with most brits, the conviction that strict gun control is necessary is a standard part of the political catechism---absorbed as if my osmosis from a young age. wrapping up his piece, he couldn't help but snidely conclude that the Americans' skepticism toward gun control was the product of an irrational and abstract belief system with which one cannot reason." p122

its a very good chapter in an overall excellent read so far...and I heartily recommend it.

< Message edited by bounty44 -- 10/23/2016 7:00:18 PM >

(in reply to freedomdwarf1)
Profile   Post #: 228
RE: How long after a ban will criminals still have fire... - 10/23/2016 8:23:52 PM   
BamaD


Posts: 20687
Joined: 2/27/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44

quote:

Laws are supposed to evolve with the times to benefit the people.


that right there is a hallmark difference between liberals, who more or less believe what you just said, and conservatives, who more or less believe that certain laws are timeless and the nature of the latter are the ones that protect our liberty.

interestingly enough, I am right this minute reading a chapter in Charles cooke's (one of your countrymen) book "conservatarianism" on guns.

the chapter is called "guns: a study in success."

I think you might locate yourself in the section im about to quote. its cooke commenting on a bbc reporter sent to cover the shooting at Virginia tech a handful of years ago, and how chagrined he (the reporter) was when he kept finding people he was interviewing, lamenting the strict gun laws that prevented THEM from putting an early end to the carnage:

"spluttering and blinking, and trying as hard as he could to shake off everything he thought he knew, he made a valiant effort to grasp his interviewees' positions. but it was no good. for him, as with most brits, the conviction that strict gun control is necessary is a standard part of the political catechism---absorbed as if my osmosis from a young age. wrapping up his piece, he couldn't help but snidely conclude that the Americans' skepticism toward gun control was the product of an irrational and abstract belief system with which one cannot reason." p122

its a very good chapter in an overall excellent read so far...and I heartily recommend it.

Reality doesn't count, only their feelings.

_____________________________

Government ranges from a necessary evil to an intolerable one. Thomas Paine

People don't believe they can defend themselves because they have guns, they have guns because they believe they can defend themselves.

(in reply to bounty44)
Profile   Post #: 229
RE: How long after a ban will criminals still have fire... - 10/23/2016 9:01:05 PM   
tamaka


Posts: 5079
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

ORIGINAL: tamaka

There is such a thing as the spirit of the law... much of the point of the 2nd ammendment, i think, is the spirit of the law.


I have just shown you what the spirit of the 2nd ammendment was so please save your flag waving for the nra rally


The spirit being that ultimately, the right of the people to protect their free nation... a nation that was purposely formed of the people, for the people (not for the corporations, the 1%, or the likes, and by the people.

Get a grip son and read some history that was not written for a fifth grader. The 1% is exactly who the constitution was written for. Why do you think we have the 17th ammendment? When the constituion was written senators were appointed so that we commoners had no say. The problem came when they were so wrapped up with internacine conflict that many senatoral seats were vacant and a quorum could not be reached so government stoped.




The 2nd Ammendment was put there to solidify that spirit.


It has been shown that the only reason for the 2nd ammendment was to preserve slavery. The militias kept meticulous records and they are availabel for anyone who wishes to peruse them. Job one of the militia was hunting down runaway slaves and searching slave quarters for contraband.




The commoners elected the people and although it sucks, a Representative Republic was and still is the only realistic way to manage the country. It would be really hard to get all of the people (well men back then) to have to educate everyone and hold a vote everytime a decision had to be made. That's just common sense.

Regarding the militia, what would they be doing otherwise at the time?

And btw i'm not a 'Son' as you referred to me. Not only is my physical body of the female sex, but also i identify with the female gender. ; )


(in reply to thompsonx)
Profile   Post #: 230
RE: How long after a ban will criminals still have fire... - 10/23/2016 9:18:00 PM   
freedomdwarf1


Posts: 6845
Joined: 10/23/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44
...and how chagrined he (the reporter) was when he kept finding people he was interviewing, lamenting the strict gun laws that prevented THEM from putting an early end to the carnage

Virginia gun law: Open carry of a handgun without a permit is legal in Virginia at age 18, withstanding other applicable laws. Concealed carry of a handgun is allowed for persons who hold a valid CHP (concealed handgun permit), comply with certain restrictions, or who hold certain positions.

Are you telling me that NOBODY was carrying when this happened??
More than likely (IMO) they were carrying but didn't want to step in.
Too concerned in self-preservation than actually helping others.

We hear this crap from gun nuts at every major gun incident (which happens several times every year).
Yet very few (if any) actually step in to help the poor victims.
Yet they constantly bleat that guns are necessary to prevent such crimes happening.
Some are advocating even more guns for that very reason.
There are many states that have similar laws allowing carry in public places.

Ergo: having and carrying guns generally don't help anyone but the carrier pursuing a selfish endeavour.

Guns are the selfish preserve of those wanting them, aided and abetted by the prolification of availability, lax laws that are inadequately enforced and further reinforced by outdated parts of the constitution that should have been annexed eons ago.


Let's get this straight - there's nothing intrinsically wrong in having guns.
We have them here too; just like all the other OECD countries.
Nobody is trying to take your guns away or advocating a total ban.
The essential difference is the mindset of the owners and restrictions.
We (the majority of OECD countries) all accepted the major restriction that guns in public places aren't allowed.
That allowed the whole country to be designated a 'gun free zone', not just little bits of it.
After all, we are constantly reminded that criminals don't obey signs or laws.
We also accepted that shooting someone automatically put you on the defensive in the eyes of the law (ie, guilty until proven innocent) unless you could prove there was a damned good reason for even using a firearm in the first place (even at your home).
These two concepts are the major difference between the US and other countries.
And we see the results, year on year, where the US is almost a lawless anarchy in comparison to the rest of us.

The stats speak for themselves and have done for many years.
There's your inescapable evidence.

And yes, I know a death is a death whether from a gun or a knife etc.
Bama and others will always bring this up.
However, the point is, most mass killings wouldn't have happened if there wasn't a gun.
Defending an attack from a gun is not so easy; with anything else, it's virtually a hand-to-hand event which can easily be avoided or countered especially where there is more than one person defending.
Have you tried killing someone from 20 paces?
Dead easy with a gun (pun intended). Not so easy with any other weapon.
And that's the essential difference.



< Message edited by freedomdwarf1 -- 10/23/2016 9:24:38 PM >

_____________________________

“If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear.”
George Orwell, 1903-1950


(in reply to bounty44)
Profile   Post #: 231
RE: How long after a ban will criminals still have fire... - 10/23/2016 9:22:28 PM   
BamaD


Posts: 20687
Joined: 2/27/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: tamaka


quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

ORIGINAL: tamaka

There is such a thing as the spirit of the law... much of the point of the 2nd ammendment, i think, is the spirit of the law.


I have just shown you what the spirit of the 2nd ammendment was so please save your flag waving for the nra rally


The spirit being that ultimately, the right of the people to protect their free nation... a nation that was purposely formed of the people, for the people (not for the corporations, the 1%, or the likes, and by the people.

Get a grip son and read some history that was not written for a fifth grader. The 1% is exactly who the constitution was written for. Why do you think we have the 17th ammendment? When the constituion was written senators were appointed so that we commoners had no say. The problem came when they were so wrapped up with internacine conflict that many senatoral seats were vacant and a quorum could not be reached so government stoped.




The 2nd Ammendment was put there to solidify that spirit.


It has been shown that the only reason for the 2nd ammendment was to preserve slavery. The militias kept meticulous records and they are availabel for anyone who wishes to peruse them. Job one of the militia was hunting down runaway slaves and searching slave quarters for contraband.




The commoners elected the people and although it sucks, a Representative Republic was and still is the only realistic way to manage the country. It would be really hard to get all of the people (well men back then) to have to educate everyone and hold a vote everytime a decision had to be made. That's just common sense.

Regarding the militia, what would they be doing otherwise at the time?

And btw i'm not a 'Son' as you referred to me. Not only is my physical body of the female sex, but also i identify with the female gender. ; )



He insists that because guns were used by slave catchers the 2nd was written for them. He ignores the fact that some of the strongest proponents of the 2nd were strongly anti slavery. He also can't see that this is like saying the model A ford was created for bank robbers because it was the choice of John Dillinger.

_____________________________

Government ranges from a necessary evil to an intolerable one. Thomas Paine

People don't believe they can defend themselves because they have guns, they have guns because they believe they can defend themselves.

(in reply to tamaka)
Profile   Post #: 232
RE: How long after a ban will criminals still have fire... - 10/23/2016 9:52:44 PM   
tamaka


Posts: 5079
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1

quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44
...and how chagrined he (the reporter) was when he kept finding people he was interviewing, lamenting the strict gun laws that prevented THEM from putting an early end to the carnage

Virginia gun law: Open carry of a handgun without a permit is legal in Virginia at age 18, withstanding other applicable laws. Concealed carry of a handgun is allowed for persons who hold a valid CHP (concealed handgun permit), comply with certain restrictions, or who hold certain positions.

Are you telling me that NOBODY was carrying when this happened??
More than likely (IMO) they were carrying but didn't want to step in.
Too concerned in self-preservation than actually helping others.



Virginia Tech does not allow guns on campus (sucks huh?... well it sure did that day).

And your opinion is probably formed by the culture in which you live in... over here in America we tend to think differently.

(in reply to freedomdwarf1)
Profile   Post #: 233
RE: How long after a ban will criminals still have fire... - 10/23/2016 10:09:39 PM   
Edwird


Posts: 3558
Joined: 5/2/2016
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
And your idea of "senseble" is merely the bleating of sheep who put their lives in the hands of their betters in the ruling class.


No, actually, it's Republicans in the US who constantly argue putting all matters of society into the hands of their 'betters,' the corporatocracy, which in instance of the financial industry we come upon the (un)happy occasion of the homonym 'bettors.' With your and my money.

Lemmings such as you and your kind have no clue, and certainly have no standing in trying to call out sheep.

Eager cock sucking of CEOs by Republican politicians (and too many Democrats, lately) and mindless obeisance by 'conservative' voters to that cause leave us laughing at that ridiculous statement of yours.

No, actually, in Germanic/Nordic countries they actually insist that both government and corporations only exist at the behest of society in the first place, and are expected to serve that end before proceeding further.

(in reply to BamaD)
Profile   Post #: 234
RE: How long after a ban will criminals still have fire... - 10/23/2016 10:20:00 PM   
freedomdwarf1


Posts: 6845
Joined: 10/23/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: tamaka
Virginia Tech does not allow guns on campus (sucks huh?... well it sure did that day).

And our whole country is a gun free zone. Your point is??
Your murderer either couldn't read, or didn't care.
They still went in and shot the place up.
If he didn't have a gun, he couldn't have done that.
Was there nobody to stop him OUTSIDE the campus - before he got in?
The same with all the other shocking killings in the US - completely avoidable in most cases.

quote:

ORIGINAL: tamaka
And your opinion is probably formed by the culture in which you live in... over here in America we tend to think differently.

We noticed - in the gun deaths in the US compared to every other OECD country.
Maybe you just like killing each other.
To us, that doesn't make any sense.


< Message edited by freedomdwarf1 -- 10/23/2016 10:23:31 PM >

_____________________________

“If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear.”
George Orwell, 1903-1950


(in reply to tamaka)
Profile   Post #: 235
RE: How long after a ban will criminals still have fire... - 10/24/2016 4:04:51 AM   
thompsonx


Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline
ORIGINAL: BamaD


Allow me to elaborate,
A the 2nd is not a law, it is part of the operating system that the law operates under.


Article 6 section 2 says you need to go back to school.

2. This constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, any thing in the constitution or laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding.



B by being "at the crossroads of European and Hispanic society I mean that our society as influences from both and that or society cannot be judged by either. Due to the European influence it is to easy to congratulate our selves and accept high crime rate, thus precluding progress.
Being judged as a purely European society is to ignore the reality of the type of mixed society we have with influences from far more violent societies and creating a feeling of helplessness in dealing with violence.


Perhaps the university of dumbass does not teach that Spain (hispanic) is part of europe. That france,spain,portugal, italy,and romania are latin or romance (roman) languages.
Also quite curious as to which of the european "tribes" germanic,hispanic or slavic you consider to be the "violent" ones?

C If your view is stupid needs clarifying you are beyond hope.

Your understanding and practice of stupid seems to be highly developed.

(in reply to BamaD)
Profile   Post #: 236
RE: How long after a ban will criminals still have fire... - 10/24/2016 4:20:37 AM   
thompsonx


Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline
ORIGINAL: bounty44

quote:

Laws are supposed to evolve with the times to benefit the people.


that right there is a hallmark difference between liberals, who more or less believe what you just said, and conservatives, who more or less believe that certain laws are timeless and the nature of the latter are the ones that protect our liberty.

Another graduate of the university of dumbass opens his mouth and spews forth his ignorance.
Tell us of the illegality of ammendments 13,14,15,16,17,19 and 26. All of which actually change the constitution. Do you as a self proclaimed "conservative" denounce these changes to the constitution or are you just expressing another instance of oral diarhia?

(in reply to bounty44)
Profile   Post #: 237
RE: How long after a ban will criminals still have fire... - 10/24/2016 4:46:42 AM   
thompsonx


Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline
ORIGINAL: tamaka


The commoners elected the people and although it sucks, a Representative Republic was and still is the only realistic way to manage the country.


Let's take a look at our history. When has a member of the house of representatives been elected who was not on the list of "approved" candidates from a major party?
When has a member of the lower house of any state legislature not been on the list of "approved" candidates of a major party?
Since the state legislature appointed that states senators to the u.s. senate (before the 17 ammendment) the "people" had no voice in the selection process for the u.s. senate. After the 17th. ammendment they still have no voice since our choice for senator is from an "approved" list of candidates submitted by the major political parties. What the 17th. ammendment actually accomplishes is that there will always be a quorum in the senate.
The rueling elete who created the constitution created it in such a way as to ensure they would remain the rueling elite...the voice of the people is simply an illusion.



It would be really hard to get all of the people (well men back then) to have to educate everyone and hold a vote everytime a decision had to be made. That's just common sense.

I do not have a problem with representative democracy only with the contrived manner in which the "representatives" are appointed. In communist/socialist countries they have elections just as we do. The people are given a list of approved "asshole" from which to choose.

Regarding the militia, what would they be doing otherwise at the time?

That was my point. The whole purpose of the militia was to insure the perpetuation of slavery. As a fighting force to "repel invaders" or prevent the "over-reach" of the federal government it was not.


And btw i'm not a 'Son' as you referred to me. Not only is my physical body of the female sex, but also i identify with the female gender. ; )

The term "son" was simply a disparaging term on my part and I appologize.


(in reply to tamaka)
Profile   Post #: 238
RE: How long after a ban will criminals still have fire... - 10/24/2016 5:06:05 AM   
thompsonx


Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline
ORIGINAL: BamaD


He insists that because guns were used by slave catchers the 2nd was written for them. He ignores the fact that some of the strongest proponents of the 2nd were strongly anti slavery.

You are full of shit. As has been pointed out the anti-federalist refused to vote for the constitution without a bill of rights. The federalist agreed so, as has been pointed out to you, they had to vote for it to insure the ratification of the constitution. You have cited people like john adams being pro gun by taking his words out of context. While he was in favor of individual gun ownership it was not for the purpose you allude...as has been pointed out to you, by me, on many occasions.


He also can't see that this is like saying the model A ford was created for bank robbers because it was the choice of John Dillinger.


Your analogy fails miserably since the model a had universal purpose, the militia, as clearly documented by the official records of the state militias, did not.
Jesus you are phoquing stupid.

(in reply to BamaD)
Profile   Post #: 239
RE: How long after a ban will criminals still have fire... - 10/24/2016 5:09:21 AM   
bounty44


Posts: 6374
Joined: 11/1/2014
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1

quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44
...and how chagrined he (the reporter) was when he kept finding people he was interviewing, lamenting the strict gun laws that prevented THEM from putting an early end to the carnage

Virginia gun law: Open carry of a handgun without a permit is legal in Virginia at age 18, withstanding other applicable laws. Concealed carry of a handgun is allowed for persons who hold a valid CHP (concealed handgun permit), comply with certain restrictions, or who hold certain positions.

Are you telling me that NOBODY was carrying when this happened??
More than likely (IMO) they were carrying but didn't want to step in.
Too concerned in self-preservation than actually helping others.


I am not telling you anything, im merely quoting the book.

but since you bring it up, the laws in question referenced in the quote don't have to do with the state law per se, but rather the laws at the time (and probably still today) prohibiting guns from campus. I trust you have heard over and over how "gun free zones" are places of attraction for shooters and how law abiding citizens are left defenseless when a crisis occurs.

and given that there are plenty of instances of armed bystanders helping would-be victims from becoming actual victims, your cynicism, or naivete, in the rest of your post that I quoted is unfortunate.



(in reply to freedomdwarf1)
Profile   Post #: 240
Page:   <<   < prev  10 11 [12] 13 14   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: How long after a ban will criminals still have firearms. Page: <<   < prev  10 11 [12] 13 14   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.125