Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: Las Vegas shooting unfolding now


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

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Las Vegas shooting unfolding now Page: <<   < prev  24 25 [26] 27 28   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Las Vegas shooting unfolding now - 10/5/2017 4:10:53 PM   
Greta75


Posts: 9968
Joined: 2/6/2011
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
Only a fool takes martial arts to a gun fight.
So the 95 pound woman with martial arts skills will defeat a 250 pound
man with martial arts skill.

Possibly. If she is better.
I've seen 130lbs skinny men take down 250lbs men in martial arts. They run circles around the bigger guy and tire him out first.

(in reply to BamaD)
Profile   Post #: 501
RE: Las Vegas shooting unfolding now - 10/5/2017 4:11:22 PM   
JVoV


Posts: 3657
Joined: 3/9/2015
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Greta75

quote:

ORIGINAL: JVoV
THE RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED.

Never mind that you completely ignored the rest of my post, explaining the Second Amendment. The right to bear arms SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED.

No other Constitutional Amendment is worded so strongly. None of them.

The RIGHT to BEAR ARMS.

Not the RIGHT to bear ALL types of Arms or Unlimited Arms.

As I said, the law is NOT specific. And reality is, you don't have the right to Bear ANY TYPE of arms in the US currently.

The fact that there are forbidden weapons currently, tells me that, this LAW isn't bullet proof that protects you from the right to Bear ANY ARMS.

So if they restrict the type of guns you can buy from stores.

That wouldn't be trespassing the law. Because you still get access to arms. Just selected ones. Which is already happening.




SHALL
NOT
BE
INFRINGED.

The fact that there are weapons banned currently is an indication that the Supreme Court has not had the same Constitutional views as it does now. That happens. A fucking lot.

(in reply to Greta75)
Profile   Post #: 502
RE: Las Vegas shooting unfolding now - 10/5/2017 4:13:32 PM   
Greta75


Posts: 9968
Joined: 2/6/2011
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: JVoV
SHALL
NOT
BE
INFRINGED.

The fact that there are weapons banned currently is an indication that the Supreme Court has not had the same Constitutional views as it does now. That happens. A fucking lot.

That's what you like to believe, but the supreme court would not be able to "infringed" the second amendment because it IS NOT INFRINGED! They have still given you the right to bear arms. And your right to bear arms has not been infringed. You still have arms don't you?

It never said, you have the right to bear ANY TYPE of Arms.

(in reply to JVoV)
Profile   Post #: 503
RE: Las Vegas shooting unfolding now - 10/5/2017 4:14:44 PM   
BamaD


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

ORIGINAL: Greta75

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
So we should violate it a little so later we can violate it more.

It's not violated. The fact that there is some regulation, means it's legal.
I mean, how can the amendments be violated? It is law.

You guys just don't have the right definition. That law is not bulletproof. Because of the way it is worded. It is not specific enough.

That's how the law works. There is no way these regulations could pass unless it is deem that the second amendment doesn't mean that you have the right to bear ANY Types of ARMS.

Congress violated the Constitution and got away with it.

_____________________________

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 Greta75)
Profile   Post #: 504
RE: Las Vegas shooting unfolding now - 10/5/2017 4:18:30 PM   
JVoV


Posts: 3657
Joined: 3/9/2015
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Greta75


quote:

ORIGINAL: JVoV
SHALL
NOT
BE
INFRINGED.

The fact that there are weapons banned currently is an indication that the Supreme Court has not had the same Constitutional views as it does now. That happens. A fucking lot.

That's what you like to believe, but the supreme court would not be able to "infringed" the second amendment because it IS NOT INFRINGED! They have still given you the right to bear arms. And your right to bear arms has not been infringed. You still have arms don't you?

It never said, you have the right to bear ANY TYPE of Arms.


You don't understand the purpose of the Second Amendment. Or likely any of the Bill of Rights, or subsequent amendments. How could you, without taking an American Civics class of some sort.

(in reply to Greta75)
Profile   Post #: 505
RE: Las Vegas shooting unfolding now - 10/5/2017 4:18:39 PM   
Greta75


Posts: 9968
Joined: 2/6/2011
Status: offline 		Inreplytoladypact
quote:

No, Greta. It honestly doesn't work that way. When deer are wounded, they run to the best of their ability, meaning even up to top speed. You're talking about a scared, wounded animal that by instinct is running for it's life. You want to put the animal down, rather than let it suffer.

I've hit a deer with a car going 60 MPH. The deer ran away after the impact. I have no idea if it died from it's injuries or not.

I also wanted to add something about your comment about how it's not sportsmanship to use more than one bullet. That's nice and all, but you are conveniently forgetting that hunting isn't just sport for some people. There are still people in this country that hunt to eat/supplement their food budget. They depend on the meat from hunting to feed their families. If it takes two shots to put the deer down, it's better to do it.

So basically, that's my point. IF after first shot, the deer runs away fast. There is also high possibly of second or third or fourth shot missing because if as you said, it just runs away, because, it's harder to hit a fast moving target than a stationary one.

And traditionally before semi-automatic exists, haven't all the fore fathers always hunted for food with regular guns without all the modern fancy upgrade? Come on!

(in reply to BamaD)
Profile   Post #: 506
RE: Las Vegas shooting unfolding now - 10/5/2017 4:19:17 PM   
CreativeDominant


Posts: 11032
Joined: 3/11/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: heavyblinker

Lucy said it, but it isn't exclusively about guns.
It's about people who shouldn't have guns being able to get the biggest, most powerful guns whenever they want them.
This includes the mentally ill, the frustrated, the angry, the hateful, the racist, the bullied, children, toddlers, etc.

Every time anyone proposes even discussing the issue, the RWNJ news is almost immediately flooded with hysterical shit about liberals wanting to ban all guns, how they will fight to the death anyone who tries to take them away, etc. etc.

All bills are defeated in congress, all proposals met with conspiracies, paranoia and insanity... and any discussion about moderate gun control becomes 'DEATH TO ALL WHO WOULD DEPRIVE ME OF FREEDOM'.

The right is literally incapable of anything except simple black-and-white thinking.
This is why the NRA will always be able to keep the most lethal guns in the hands of the people who will do the most harm.
Moderate gun control. There are laws on the books now regarding gun control. Some people think those laws are too restrictive, some think they are not restrictive enough, some think they are fine. Who no w gets to decide what...if anything...further needs to be done?

You? Bounty? Awareness? A panel?

(in reply to heavyblinker)
Profile   Post #: 507
RE: Las Vegas shooting unfolding now - 10/5/2017 4:20:44 PM   
Greta75


Posts: 9968
Joined: 2/6/2011
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: JVoV


quote:

ORIGINAL: Greta75


quote:

ORIGINAL: JVoV
SHALL
NOT
BE
INFRINGED.

The fact that there are weapons banned currently is an indication that the Supreme Court has not had the same Constitutional views as it does now. That happens. A fucking lot.

That's what you like to believe, but the supreme court would not be able to "infringed" the second amendment because it IS NOT INFRINGED! They have still given you the right to bear arms. And your right to bear arms has not been infringed. You still have arms don't you?

It never said, you have the right to bear ANY TYPE of Arms.


You don't understand the purpose of the Second Amendment. Or likely any of the Bill of Rights, or subsequent amendments. How could you, without taking an American Civics class of some sort.


All I understand now, is you are saying that you know better than the Supreme Court about the law. And you are accusing the Supreme court of trespassing the 2nd Amendment. To me, The Supreme Court is made up of Judges who are the EXPERTS in the law. And since they find it okay to put restrictions on gun ownership. This means that the correct interpretation is The Right To Bear Arms, doesn't mean Any Arms.

It's like am I gonna believe your definition. Or those Supreme judges definition?

(in reply to JVoV)
Profile   Post #: 508
RE: Las Vegas shooting unfolding now - 10/5/2017 4:24:52 PM   
BamaD


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

ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant


quote:

ORIGINAL: heavyblinker

Lucy said it, but it isn't exclusively about guns.
It's about people who shouldn't have guns being able to get the biggest, most powerful guns whenever they want them.
This includes the mentally ill, the frustrated, the angry, the hateful, the racist, the bullied, children, toddlers, etc.

Every time anyone proposes even discussing the issue, the RWNJ news is almost immediately flooded with hysterical shit about liberals wanting to ban all guns, how they will fight to the death anyone who tries to take them away, etc. etc.

All bills are defeated in congress, all proposals met with conspiracies, paranoia and insanity... and any discussion about moderate gun control becomes 'DEATH TO ALL WHO WOULD DEPRIVE ME OF FREEDOM'.

The right is literally incapable of anything except simple black-and-white thinking.
This is why the NRA will always be able to keep the most lethal guns in the hands of the people who will do the most harm.
Moderate gun control. There are laws on the books now regarding gun control. Some people think those laws are too restrictive, some think they are not restrictive enough, some think they are fine. Who no w gets to decide what...if anything...further needs to be done?

You? Bounty? Awareness? A panel?

All of these bills are undermined when it is admitted that the bill wouldn't
have done anything to stop the crime that provided the excuse for the bill.
@nd none of the bills affect criminals, just legitimate gun owners.

_____________________________

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 CreativeDominant)
Profile   Post #: 509
RE: Las Vegas shooting unfolding now - 10/5/2017 4:26:39 PM   
Greta75


Posts: 9968
Joined: 2/6/2011
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
Congress violated the Constitution and got away with it.

Well, a government really can only work only within the confines of the law.

If you feel somebody has breach of contract and you are suing that person. Chances are, IF that person did not specify specified enough terms in the contract and leave certain terms to open interpretation. That person will be leaving holes.

Same with the second amendment. It is not bulletproof.

The congress violated nothing. This is how the law works. The less specific the law is. The more holes there are which is within the legal framework of the law for the lawyers or judges to interpret.




(in reply to BamaD)
Profile   Post #: 510
RE: Las Vegas shooting unfolding now - 10/5/2017 4:27:38 PM   
JVoV


Posts: 3657
Joined: 3/9/2015
Status: offline 		No, Greta. Our Supreme Court has always been made up of people who interpret the law as they see fit. This is a combination of public opinion, religious and racial bias, laws and court cases around the world, and many other things.

Bowers v. Hardwick (1986)

The Supreme Court ruled 5–4 that consenting adults do not have a constitutional right to engage in homosexual acts in private, upholding a Georgia law. The majority said the "right of privacy" under the Due Process Clause does not give homosexuals the right to engage in sodomy. The "right to privacy" protects intimate marital and familial relations, but the Court said it does not cover gay sodomy because "no connection between family, marriage, or procreation on the one hand and homosexual activity on the other has been demonstrated." This decision, considered a serious blow to the gay-rights movement, was overturned in 2003's Lawrence v. Texas decision.

Lawrence v. Texas (2003)

The Supreme Court, 6–3, overruled a Texas sodomy law and voted 5–4 to overturn 1986's Bowers v. Hardwick decision. "The state cannot demean their [gays'] existence or control their destiny by making their private sexual conduct a crime," wrote Justice Kennedy in the majority opinion. In his dissent to Lawrence v. Texas, Justice Scalia said the court has "largely signed on to the so-called homosexual agenda."

(in reply to Greta75)
Profile   Post #: 511
RE: Las Vegas shooting unfolding now - 10/5/2017 4:30:26 PM   
Greta75


Posts: 9968
Joined: 2/6/2011
Status: offline 		Gay rights are not in the amendments. That is different.

But we are talking about all the main amendments. Those are the pillars of America. And they would not trespass those laws. They have to make laws within the legal framework of those amendments.

So it is quite a baseless accusation that they have trespass those laws.

And yes, that's what I was saying too, that as long as a law is not specific enough. It can be argued any way. That's how laws work. The more generic sounding it is, the more a lawyer could make a case for it on any angle he wants.

I am just saying that the 2nd amendment isn't bulletproof to your definition. It leaves itself open to other definitions. Which is all perfectly legal in the eyes of the law.

(in reply to JVoV)
Profile   Post #: 512
RE: Las Vegas shooting unfolding now - 10/5/2017 4:31:40 PM   
JVoV


Posts: 3657
Joined: 3/9/2015
Status: offline 		Want some more?

Plessy v. Ferguson (1896)

The Court stated that segregation was legal and constitutional as long as "facilities were equal"β€”the famous "separate but equal" segregation policy.

Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka (1954)

Reversed Plessy v. Ferguson "separate but equal" ruling. "[S]egregation [in public education] is a denial of the equal protection of the laws."

(in reply to JVoV)
Profile   Post #: 513
RE: Las Vegas shooting unfolding now - 10/5/2017 4:33:26 PM   
JVoV


Posts: 3657
Joined: 3/9/2015
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Greta75

Gay rights are not in the amendments. That is different.

But we are talking about all the main amendments. Those are the pillars of America. And they would not trespass those laws. They have to make laws within the legal framework of those amendments.

So it is quite a baseless accusation that they have trespass those laws.


Due process is a fucking Amendment. Learn the goddam Constitution if you're gonna comment on it.

(in reply to Greta75)
Profile   Post #: 514
RE: Las Vegas shooting unfolding now - 10/5/2017 4:33:30 PM   
Wayward5oul


Posts: 3314
Joined: 11/9/2014
Status: offline 		Greta, do you understand what the word "infringe" means? I think that you are missing the point because of it. Infringe means to limit, to restrict. So replace the word "infringe" with "restrict". The right to beat arms shall not be restricted. The right to bear arms shall not be limited.

Now do you see what they are trying to tell you?

(in reply to BamaD)
Profile   Post #: 515
RE: Las Vegas shooting unfolding now - 10/5/2017 4:37:08 PM   
Greta75


Posts: 9968
Joined: 2/6/2011
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Wayward5oul

Greta, do you understand what the word "infringe" means? I think that you are missing the point because of it. Infringe means to limit, to restrict. So replace the word "infringe" with "restrict". The right to beat arms shall not be restricted. The right to bear arms shall not be limited.

Now do you see what they are trying to tell you?

Infringed literally means, that, they should not stop people from carrying arms. That's what the "infringed" part mean to me. It doesn't say, there cannot be some restrictions. As long as the over-all philosophy of being allowed access to some arms still exist. The second amendment is not broken.
And as I was saying that, IF infringed means what you think it means, the supreme court couldn't possibly actually already have some current restrictions. The only way for them to do that, is because the word "infringed" doesn't mean what you think it mean.

(in reply to Wayward5oul)
Profile   Post #: 516
RE: Las Vegas shooting unfolding now - 10/5/2017 4:37:30 PM   
Wayward5oul


Posts: 3314
Joined: 11/9/2014
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: JVoV


quote:

ORIGINAL: Greta75

Gay rights are not in the amendments. That is different.

But we are talking about all the main amendments. Those are the pillars of America. And they would not trespass those laws. They have to make laws within the legal framework of those amendments.

So it is quite a baseless accusation that they have trespass those laws.


Due process is a fucking Amendment. Learn the goddam Constitution if you're gonna comment on it.

LOL welcome to the club!

(in reply to JVoV)
Profile   Post #: 517
RE: Las Vegas shooting unfolding now - 10/5/2017 4:39:58 PM   
bounty44


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

ORIGINAL: Greta75

quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44

greta, by way of trying to answer your question of "what is 'the right' doing about it?" let me ask you a couple of things first.

by "the right" im assuming you mean republicans in congress?

can you say what it is you would like them to do that would have prevented this event?

No, I want them to come up with the solution since they reject ALL the left solution. So they need to come up with their own solutions. Because they will never agree to anything the left suggest.
I'd like them to actually come up with solutions rather than saying that, there is nothing they could have done. Because that is 100% not true.


can you please answer my questions.

(in reply to Greta75)
Profile   Post #: 518
RE: Las Vegas shooting unfolding now - 10/5/2017 4:41:35 PM   
JVoV


Posts: 3657
Joined: 3/9/2015
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Wayward5oul


quote:

ORIGINAL: JVoV


quote:

ORIGINAL: Greta75

Gay rights are not in the amendments. That is different.

But we are talking about all the main amendments. Those are the pillars of America. And they would not trespass those laws. They have to make laws within the legal framework of those amendments.

So it is quite a baseless accusation that they have trespass those laws.


Due process is a fucking Amendment. Learn the goddam Constitution if you're gonna comment on it.

LOL welcome to the club!



It's always weird being on this side of the argument. But Greta makes me wanna go to the damn gun show next weekend.

(in reply to Wayward5oul)
Profile   Post #: 519
RE: Las Vegas shooting unfolding now - 10/5/2017 4:43:39 PM   
Wayward5oul


Posts: 3314
Joined: 11/9/2014
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: JVoV


quote:

ORIGINAL: Wayward5oul


quote:

ORIGINAL: JVoV


quote:

ORIGINAL: Greta75

Gay rights are not in the amendments. That is different.

But we are talking about all the main amendments. Those are the pillars of America. And they would not trespass those laws. They have to make laws within the legal framework of those amendments.

So it is quite a baseless accusation that they have trespass those laws.


Due process is a fucking Amendment. Learn the goddam Constitution if you're gonna comment on it.

LOL welcome to the club!



It's always weird being on this side of the argument. But Greta makes me wanna go to the damn gun show next weekend.

She has that effect on people.

(in reply to JVoV)
Profile   Post #: 520
Page:   <<   < prev  24 25 [26] 27 28   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Las Vegas shooting unfolding now Page: <<   < prev  24 25 [26] 27 28   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

0.172