2nd amendment What do you Think?

[mushroomsatsuji]

Lets just say you'll have to pry my guns from my cold dead, bloody hands.

[Bobs16]

Originally Posted by mushroomsatsuji

Lets just say you'll have to pry my guns from my cold dead, bloody hands.

Umm....ok so back on topic here. I do not remember anyone saying they are going to take your guns away nor will they take mine.

[mushroomsatsuji]

Originally Posted by Bobs16

Umm....ok so back on topic here. I do not remember anyone saying they are going to take your guns away nor will they take mine.

That was too general. I meant that I dont believe that it means that only a militia should have the right to bear arms, that all citizens should have that right.

[numba1stunna885]

Originally Posted by Chaohinon

I think you'll find that most "gun crimes" can be traced to people with black market ownership. Legitimate gun ownership contributes to public safety more often than anything else, and has even been the saving grace of many police officers who find themselves in a bind.

http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=975

The truth about gun laws follows the same pattern as drugs and prostitution. All illegalization does is give an advantage to criminals.

Look at my original post in this thread. I never said anything about making guns illegal and considered the exact point your brought up about how our world is safer because law abiding citizens can own a gun. I just stated my opinion that we as a society would benefit from having some sort of limit to the number of guns an individual can possess. In my opinion for personal protection in an emergency, no more than 1 gun is neccesary, and the people who own large amounts of weapons are contributing to the problem in the event that there weapons are stolen, as many gun thieves specifically target people with multiple firearms. I simply find no reason for any person to need to own 10 guns or whatever, it's definitely excessive and serves no purpose. I mean how many guns can you fire at one time to protect yourself? I'm all for people who obey the law being able to own guns, but I mean there needs to be some sort of standards/guidelines, at least IMO.

[JacobR]

It's more like -

We have the right to bear arms in case there was ever a need for a militia.

[bikeguy]

If someone at virginia tech had a gun then there wouldnt be nearly as many deaths. And the shooter would have found a gun whether they are legal or not.

[guitarplay]

i find that there are a few ways too look at this:

1) interpretation of what is written

2) personal opinion

3) interpretation translated into a modern view

_______________________________________________

1) it states in the constitution that we have the right to a well regulated militia and therefore the right to bear arms. The thing is, does this give us the right to bear arms in orderd to be prepared to form a well regulated militia or only if we are part of one. As it is stated, it seems that the law should be that only within a well regulated militia do we have the right to bear arms. This then of course gives way to what is "well regulated" who is doing the "regulating" and what is a "militia" defined as

2) i believe that due to the current state of affairs, there is in fact a need to give citizens the rights to bear arms in order to be prepared for a militia. With such a strong army it has not been of any concern to maintain one, but this does not mean we will never in the future need one. It has become common to regulate wars between organized nations, but when the government infrastructure fails leaving the citizens venerable they should have the means to band together and form a militia that point.

3) This amendment was made hundreds of years ago in the time of calvary muskets and bayonets. Today arms include missiles, bombs, artillery, rocket propelled grenades, explosives, high powered rifles, and fully automatic machine guns. Back in the day, it was only possible for even the best trained man to fire off maybe 3 shots a minute. Today with the M-50 it is possible to unleash an insane 5000 rounds a minute. Thats increasing the firepower by 1333%. For this reason, it is reasonable to give citizens the right to bear arms and in my opinion, any weapon they desire, but only if the citizen has proven they are not a threat to others aka background checks.

[Reggin]

Originally Posted by numba1stunna885

Compelling argument let me tell you, you sound quite intelligent. You know they sell meat at grocery stores nowadays, it is the 21st century and everything, so I don't give 2 shits what you do with your "game" you don't NEED to hunt....PERIOD. I'm sure you would just be so depressed if you couldn't go out in the woods and shoot an animal with your super powered arsenal, but I'm sure the millions of people who have lost loved ones to senseless gun crimes would find it sensible. It's idiots like yourself who think we need abide by the constitution word for word as if times haven't changed in 300 years and as if the world we live in hasn't been shattered by people shooting each other every day. So go ahead and enjoy having all your guns so you can avoid starving and all since we know you're one of those "purposeful" gun owners who try to justify having enough weaponry to take over Rhode Island. You sir are a complete moron and people like you with your contrived and stubborn line of thinking are part of the reason why our country is so messed up. Wake up and smell the coffee and read the papers.

Well, if you ever have children, I hope your young daughter gets utterly raped in every single orifice that she has, and you have no gun to protect your family.

Seriously. It would be a good show.

Granted, the quoted poster shouldn't have used the "idiots like yourself" phrase but you know that this type of post doesn't float, dude. *RMJL

[CosmicSerpent]

My position on the 2nd Amendment:

I believe that anyone over the age of 18 has the right to own a gun or multiple guns as long as they don't have a history of chronic mental illness, and haven't been convicted of any violent crimes. I also think there should be a reasonable limit on how many guns you can buy within a certain period of time.

As far as carrying a concealed weapon, I don't have a problem with it as long as the person has undergone a gun safety course. I don't believe that students in a school should be allowed to carry a gun... maybe administrators and teachers.

A lot of people will probably have a problem with the laws I've just described (even though most of them are pretty close to reality). I just get a little irritated when people start associating tighter gun regulations with banning guns altogether. There is a very clear distinction.

[cuatro veinte]

Rightfully or not I would still deem it necessary to own a gun.


There are threats everywhere. I live in L.A. but I'm not too worried about gangs or anything. More so the cops. We're at their mercy because around here to call it a police state is an understatement.

[Lebowski]

Originally Posted by wikipedia

In 1989 Japan experienced 1.3 robberies per 100,000 population, compared with [...] 233.0 for the United States;
and it experienced 1.1 murder per 100,000 population, compared with [...]8.7 for the United States that same year.

No guns in japan.

[Reggin]

Originally Posted by Lebowski

No guns in japan.

The first year results are now in: Australia-wide, homicides are up 3.2 percent, Australia-wide, assaults are up 8.6 percent; Australia-wide, armed robberies are up 44 percent (yes, 44 percent!) In the state of Victoria alone, homicides with firearms are now up 300 percent. (Note that while the law-abiding citizens turned them in, the criminals did not and criminals still possess their guns!)



While figures over the previous 25 years showed a steady decrease in armed robbery with firearms, this has changed drastically upward in the past 12 months, since the criminals now are guaranteed that their prey is unarmed.



There has also been a dramatic increase in break-ins and assaults of the elderly. Australian politicians are at a loss to explain how public safety has decreased, after such monumental effort and expense was expended in "successfully ridding Australian society of guns."



You won't see this data on the American evening news or hear your governor or members of the state Assembly disseminating this information.
The Australian experience proves it. Guns in the hands of honest citizens save lives and property and, yes, gun-control laws affect only the law-abiding citizens.
Take note Americans, before it's to late!

[My Fax]

Discussion of Guns is not allowed on the forums.


edit: I'm re-opening this, but the second this thread turns into a gun discussion, it's gonna be closed.

[numba1stunna885]

Originally Posted by Reggin

Well, if you ever have children, I hope your young daughter gets utterly raped in every single orifice that she has, and you have no gun to protect your family.

Seriously. It would be a good show.

Granted, the quoted poster shouldn't have used the "idiots like yourself" phrase but you know that this type of post doesn't float, dude. *RMJL

Calm down dude you can type whatever you want because it's obvious the only dudes that tough talk on the internet are pussy in real life. Im not into that gay shit so you type what you want from your parents computer tough guy and keep it movin

I aint gonna catch feelings just because you disagree with me and wanna talk shit instead of having a regular discussion like every else in seems to be able to do. I can understand other people having a different opinion but that shit shows that you don't even have the ability to make a valid point/argument you just resort to acting like a 10 year old instead.

[ThePhantom]

The purpose of the Second Amendment is so that people can overthrow the government if it is tyrannical. If anybody tried to overthrow the government with weapons nowadays, they would be imprisoned for life.