The Gun Issue thread

[spliff]

That about sums it up, too. It's a red neck fantasy.

I'm paraphrasing here, but...

Why is it some people fallaciously equate gun regulation to a complete ban on guns, cite the 2nd Amendment, but conveniently ignore the "well regulated" bit.

The guaranteed right for citizens to bear arms has naught to do w/ militia regulation. Me thinks you don't read very well.

[AntRobertson]

The guaranteed right for citizens to bear arms has naught to do w/ militia regulation. Me thinks you don't read very well.

"Amendment II

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."

Rather ironically I think you've failed to read and comprehend my post and have spectacularly missed the point.

[Humbert]

The guaranteed right for citizens to bear arms has naught to do w/ militia regulation. Me thinks you don't read very well.

This is what I am talking about. The people who say things like this do not read the entire bill of rights in their entirety. In the context of of the 3rd amendment, which was about harboring soldiers, and parts of all the other amendments the concerns of the constitution's writers become more clear and the necessity for a armed citizen militia was a priority. The rights of hobbyist gun owners was hardly the issue.

[spliff]

Labeling "the people" hobbyists is an issue though.

[rickschoppers]

Humbert, the US Constitution and all its amendments were written to be broad in nature to allow them to be interpreted many different ways. To put a specific meaning to the second amendment other than a US citizen's right to keep and bear arms is debatable. It is this debate that seems to be misunderstood by many when they think the 2nd amendment only refers to militias.

The Constitution is as uncertain in nature as the debate about gun control. Things will not change easily and removing the right for citizens to keep and bear arms will never happen without a revolution IMO.

[harrybarracuda]

* Not counting the above-listed anomalies, the homicide rate in England and Wales has averaged 52% higher since the outset of the 1968 gun control law and 15% higher since the outset of the 1997 handgun ban.[42]

And the GUN homicide rate, which after all is the topic of this thread?

[chassamui]

Humbert, the US Constitution and all its amendments were written to be broad in nature to allow them to be interpreted many different ways. To put a specific meaning to the second amendment other than a US citizen's right to keep and bear arms is debatable. It is this debate that seems to be misunderstood by many when they think the 2nd amendment only refers to militias.

The Constitution is as uncertain in nature as the debate about gun control. Things will not change easily and removing the right for citizens to keep and bear arms will never happen without a revolution IMO.

I am pretty sure the smart fellas who wrote the constitution and subsequent ammendments, did not intend for them to be abused, debased or misunderstood, much less allow them to be interpreted in different ways. Surely clarity of purpose and certainty were their main aims?
Or are you saying they failed, and are therefore dumb?

[panama hat]

The guaranteed right for citizens to bear arms has naught to do w/ militia regulation. Me thinks you don't read very well.

"Amendment II

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."

This is what I am talking about. The people who say things like this do not read the entire bill of rights in their entirety. In the context of of the 3rd amendment, which was about harboring soldiers, and parts of all the other amendments the concerns of the constitution's writers become more clear and the necessity for a armed citizen militia was a priority.

. . . and a jump into a tangent . . .

Labeling "the people" hobbyists is an issue though.

So, the wording of the second amendment, which has shown you to be wrong, is now irrelevant?

[panama hat]

Humbert, the US Constitution and all its amendments were written to be broad in nature to allow them to be interpreted many different ways.

This has to be the most idiotic thing I have read for a long time.

The constitution written purposely to be broad in nature to be interpreted in as many ways possible? Why have a constitution then if everything is up to interpretation?

[Humbert]

Things will not change easily and removing the right for citizens to keep and bear arms will never happen without a revolution IMO.

And no one is talking about removing the right to have guns. The debate is about regulation and control. The existing laws are clearly not working. New controls are needed.
Every time new gun control laws are proposed people such as yourself use the NRA's agrument that the ultimate goal is to remove guns from the public's hands.

[Humbert]

Labeling "the people" hobbyists is an issue though.

Why is it an issue?

[spliff]

"As civil rulers, not having their duty to the people before them, may attempt to tyrannize, and as the military forces which must be occasionally raised to defend our country, might pervert their power to the injury of their fellow citizens, the people are confirmed by the article in their right to keep and bear their private arms."
— Tench Coxe, in `Remarks on the First Part of the Amendments to the Federal Constitution’ under the Pseudonym `A Pennsylvanian’ in the Philadelphia Federal Gazette, June 18, 1789 at 2 col. 1).

[Humbert]

OK, paranoid hobbyists. Make believe patriots.

[spliff]

"make believe"? You are entitled to your opinion.

If the representatives of the people betray their constituents, there is then no recourse left but in the exertion of that original right of self-defense which is paramount to all positive forms of government, and which against the usurpations of the national rulers may be exerted with infinitely better prospect of success than against those of the rulers of an individual State. In a single State, if the persons entrusted with supreme power become usurpers, the different parcels, subdivisions, or districts of which it consists, having no distinct government in each, can take no regular measures for defense. The citizens must rush tumultuously to arms, without concert, without system, without resource; except in their courage and despair.
-- Alexander Hamilton, Federalist No. 28

[misskit]

Do any of these people who thinks anyone should have all the guns and ammunition they want, actually think the USA government is going to turn tyrannical in their lifetime?

Can you guarantee it wont?

I can't guarantee the sun won't go out tomorrow, but I'm not stocking up on flashlights just in case.

That is just paranoid.

[panama hat]

Do any of these people who thinks anyone should have all the guns and ammunition they want, actually think the USA government is going to turn tyrannical in their lifetime?

Can you guarantee it wont?

I can't guarantee the sun won't go out tomorrow, but I'm not stocking up on flashlights just in case.

That is just paranoid.

So, in the name of keeping these pie-in-the-sky tyrannical governments at bay tens of thousands of innocent men,women and children had to die.

Seems the likes of Rick 'The Sky Is Falling' Schoppers and his ilk are making a good case for the government to step in big time

[grasshopper]

Terrible thing to say, I know but the ideal solution might be for some crazed nutter to feloniously slay a large number of the immediate family of the President of the NRA. I'd like to see him express his feelings about that 'un.

[spliff]

You have to look at them as collateral sacrifices to preserve the Republic. It sounds harsh but it is what it is.

[misskit]

^ Not just harsh, but sickening. Pretty bad the brainwash job the right-wing machine have done to people, that a one would state such an awful thing.



I take that back.

We can only wish that all bullets fired by the mass shooters only hit gun toting "patriots" and their families.

[panama hat]

You have to look at them as collateral sacrifices to preserve the Republic. It sounds harsh but it is what it is.

Not just harsh, but sickening

Not harsh, not sickening . . . just downright stupid


(Hi piwanoi - fun lurking?)

[spliff]

^sorry.

[harrybarracuda]

"As civil rulers, not having their duty to the people before them, may attempt to tyrannize, and as the military forces which must be occasionally raised to defend our country, might pervert their power to the injury of their fellow citizens, the people are confirmed by the article in their right to keep and bear their private arms."
— Tench Coxe, in `Remarks on the First Part of the Amendments to the Federal Constitution’ under the Pseudonym `A Pennsylvanian’ in the Philadelphia Federal Gazette, June 18, 1789 at 2 col. 1).

That is all completely irrelevant when your "armed militia" have what might as well be pop guns against your tyrants' Blackhawks, fuel-air bombs, missiles and a variety of other sophisticated weapons.

And nukes.

[panama hat]

The difference between relying on thoughts of the 18th century from the 21st century.

I wonder why no-one has thought that may cause misunderstandings . . . but then some here think the constitution was written in a vague manner to help change it.

[MrG]

^
What is funny Ant is that this is the erroneous picture most here have of America. Anyone living in America can tell you that is pure folly, but believe what you want.

Perhaps you don't watch the news. We see gangs of rednecks all the time confronting people because they're angry about something. The last one was Government land used for cattle grazing by ranchers who have not been paying their rent and showed up with armed gangs to fight off Govt. authorities there to enforce the law. Often these people have God on their side, but I've never seen him.

[harrybarracuda]

^
What is funny Ant is that this is the erroneous picture most here have of America. Anyone living in America can tell you that is pure folly, but believe what you want.

Perhaps you don't watch the news. We see gangs of rednecks all the time confronting people because they're angry about something. The last one was Government land used for cattle grazing by ranchers who have not been paying their rent and showed up with armed gangs to fight off Govt. authorities there to enforce the law. Often these people have God on their side, but I've never seen him.

I think Rick is one of those "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants" muppets to be honest.

A whole fucking school full of dead toddlers wouldn't sway him.