RE: Gun control??? (Full Version)

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



Message

MistressLorelei -> RE: Gun control??? (7/31/2006 10:32:07 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kagesuta

quote:

ORIGINAL: MistressLorelei
On the lighter side, I'm all for the poofy sleeves too.   I'll take a guy in poofy sleeves and a big sword any day over a guy who hides behind a firearm.


Ahh... It's comments like these that reaffirm my purpose in existing. Thank you.



I just saw your post.

Awww... what a sweet comment. Thank you.

Now go put on that poofy shirt of yours.



Alumbrado -> RE: Gun control??? (7/31/2006 10:46:47 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Termyn8or

"You are not allowed to keep high explosives in a populated area, except under conditions of extreme security and protection"

The second amendment says firearms, not depleted uranium weapons, not nukes, not poison gas. ....




Actually it does not say 'firearms', it says 'arms'.

Which is so often used to mean a firearm that 'arms' may seem to exclude any other sort of weapon, but given the era in which the word was chosen, there is no logical reason to place such limitations on the term.



Termyn8or -> RE: Gun control??? (7/31/2006 11:10:06 PM)

You got me there, ME ! It does say arms.

OK, where do we go from here, what is sensible ? WMDs, Weapons of Medium Destruction ? Now the danger, to assume that they meant you should be able to kill people who are oppressing you. That is an interpretation, and is what got us here in the first place.

I never thought there would be an easy answer. I just proposed a couple of things in the light of what I said in the end. We need to return to the era of personal responsibility for our actions. The problem is, and this is a big one, that most people are not ready for that. Present company excluded, but most people, especially in the US really should not pack a rod. Too many hotheads and crazies. But as far as I am concerned, let them get killed by the people who SHOULD carry arms.

That is another piece of this, Law is supposed to be Law, you aren't supposed to be able to point to one Citizen and say "No firearms" and it's OK for another. That is a bill of attainder.

Still the simple solution would be best. Shoot someone when you shouldn't, you should be old enough to NEED a gun when you get out of prison. Kill someone you are executed, that is it.

Oh, and insanity should not be a defense. Crime of passion maybe, a BIG maybe, but insanity ? Execution. Period.If you are insane enough to shoot somebody for no good reason, tough luck. If you know anyone with mental problems think of this, do they kill people ? If they do, do you want them around ?

You might think I am a Nazi or Bolshevic or something, but let me put it this way, who's life is more important, that of one of your children or somebody who is deranged and kills people ? Go ahead and think I'm callous, but, like I said, people need to put things in perspective. I know if you kill one of my relatives you won't make it to a mental ward unless you are very very lucky.

People have got to give up the notion that each and every life of the demented, the criminals and every other form of botched development is priceless. Some lives are worthless, it is up to the liver of that life to make it valuable.

Harsh, yes. Effective, damn well would be huh ? Necessary ?, more and more each day.

T




Archer -> RE: Gun control??? (7/31/2006 11:36:57 PM)

LOL I love this lets treat them like automobiles idea, LOL

I'll take that treatment anyday you want to pass the law.

Automobile, Only needs to be registered if you are going to take it on a public street, so like an automobile I want to own but keep on my own property I don't have to register a gun that will remain on my property.

Liscence from the State I live in to drive an automobile, allows me to drive on any road in the nation. So a State issued CCP would allow me to carry anyplace in the nation.

Mandatory insurance, with reasonable limits might cause some to flintch a little but personal liability $1,000,000 is not relly that expensive.

Negligent operation already a crime for guns and atomobiles.

Criminal use of a gun already illegal for both.

What other little similarities can we come up with, I kinda like the lets regulate guns the way we regulate cars.




Archer -> RE: Gun control??? (7/31/2006 11:40:51 PM)

BTW the term "arms has always refered to weapons regualrly carried by individual soldiers in an army.
So crew served weapons like cannons even then were out. thus crew served weapons like .50 cal machinegun are out, you might be able to make a case for grenades though.




MistressLorelei -> RE: Gun control??? (8/1/2006 1:03:46 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Archer

LOL I love this lets treat them like automobiles idea, LOL

I'll take that treatment anyday you want to pass the law.

Automobile, Only needs to be registered if you are going to take it on a public street, so like an automobile I want to own but keep on my own property I don't have to register a gun that will remain on my property.

Liscence from the State I live in to drive an automobile, allows me to drive on any road in the nation. So a State issued CCP would allow me to carry anyplace in the nation.

Mandatory insurance, with reasonable limits might cause some to flintch a little but personal liability $1,000,000 is not relly that expensive.

Negligent operation already a crime for guns and atomobiles.

Criminal use of a gun already illegal for both.

What other little similarities can we come up with, I kinda like the lets regulate guns the way we regulate cars.



I said *register* the guns like we do cars (and other things), but I don't think anyone expects you to pretend your firearm is a vehicle and ride it around the block.... though to each his own.

There are two very divided sides... these threads rarely bring about anything but displaced passion.  Feel free to focus on having a gun... and giving one to any idiot who wants one.... that will certainly make all right in the world.

Also, arms means weapons, often meaning, but not limited to firearms.
Arms = weapons collectively. 




Alumbrado -> RE: Gun control??? (8/1/2006 6:48:22 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Archer

BTW the term "arms has always refered to weapons regualrly carried by individual soldiers in an army.
So crew served weapons like cannons even then were out. thus crew served weapons like .50 cal machinegun are out, you might be able to make a case for grenades though.


" arm (2)
"weapon," 1300, from O.Fr. armes (pl.), from L. arma "weapons," lit. "tools, implements (of war),"... "
(from the online etymology dictionary)

Nothing in there about individual soldiers. 

That is certainly one current usage of the word, but it in no way limits the word to only that one usage.
Given the era in which the word was chosen the Framers could have been very restrictive in their wording, but instead they deliberatey chose a word which at that time meant all weapons...and this after a war in which all the military arms of the time were fresh in everyone's memory.



Dtesmoac -> RE: Gun control??? (8/2/2006 5:49:45 PM)

Some comments from various posts on the thread:

1) I suspect that the reason no one has recently tried to invade the US has nothing to do with the armed citizens, more likely to do with the airforce and Navy...the odd Nuclear Missile .....o and money.
2) Terrorist threat, anyone have a problem with the idea of legally setting up a small army in part of the country, legally buying and equip it with various arms and then descend on a town / city / sports staium and undertaking mass murder, perfectly legally upto the point of killing the first person. And "Mrs Robinson" with her handgun won't be able to do much to stop them. An uncoordinated , untrained armed rabble will not stop a coordinated, trained bunch of fanatics intent of dieing in a blaze of glory for there "devine creator" 
3) The list of countries linking arms control to mass murder is drivel, they would have been able to undertake the killings anyway. The Germans killed 20 million plus "armed" soviets,  

If the starting point is a disarmed society then gun control makes sense and is generally achievable. Murders will tend to be non fire arm related. In an armed society, greater control of fire arm ownership makes sense to limit the access of minors and to trace and exclude the most "indescriminate weapons" e.g. Automatic weapons.

Given a society where down the bar it is unlikley that the drunk has a gun compared with one where he could well have one .....I think I prefer the guy armed with the bar stool than the one with a .45.








Kagesuta -> RE: Gun control??? (8/2/2006 7:41:10 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: MistressLorelei
I just saw your post.

Awww... what a sweet comment. Thank you.

Now go put on that poofy shirt of yours.


Yes, Ma'am!

I've been waiting to hear someone say that for years.

Oh, uh... Thread about gun-control. Right. It seems as though my previous suggestion didn't gain a whole lot of support... How about this: In order to make guns obsolete, we delve into the pages of the secret tomes of the earth, figure out how to harness the power within, and give every child a basic tutorial on the workings of shaping aether into magic! After all, who needs a gun when you can shoot fireballs out of your fingertips?

I'd also be open to the idea of exposing every human being on earth to hazardous, life-altering chemicals in an attempt to give everyone superpowers. Y'know, take your pic. Either way, we'll have reached a cooler solution than two day waiting-periods or whatever.



joyinslavery -> RE: Gun control??? (8/2/2006 7:47:11 PM)

Are we channeling the ghost of Charlton Heston?  Oh wait, is he still alive???  Well, either way, he's covered.  You know, the whole 'guns and Moses' thing.  Six of one, half-dozen the other. 



Termyn8or -> RE: Gun control??? (8/2/2006 9:38:00 PM)

Hmmmm, licensing to carry in public but you can have whatever you want in your home ?

That is not a bad position, except for the Constitution, "keep and BEAR arms shall not be infringed". To bear means to carry.

T



Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3]

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.03125