Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: 2nd Amendment and Strict Constructionists


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

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: 2nd Amendment and Strict Constructionists Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: 2nd Amendment and Strict Constructionists - 10/8/2009 1:11:22 PM   
cadenas


Posts: 517
Joined: 11/27/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata
quote:

ORIGINAL: SpinnerofTales
in any situation, the one loony with a gun is the one I'm going to focus on.

Gloria: Did you know that 65% of the people murdered in this country were killed by handguns?
Archie: Would it make you feel any better, little girl, if they was pushed out of windows?


I love that joke. But reality is that without handguns, they rarely would get killed at all.


(in reply to Kirata)
Profile   Post #: 41
RE: 2nd Amendment and Strict Constructionists - 10/8/2009 1:30:26 PM   
hizgeorgiapeach


Posts: 1672
Status: offline 		Don't fool  yourself into thinking that, Cadenas.  It's a logical falicy when  you look at the Psychology behind those who Do commit murder, vs the psychology of those who Don't.
 
If you (generic) are intent on someone's death, the mere lack of a firearm is Not going to deter you from persuing the other person's death. If you are NOT intent on the other person's death, then access to a handgun isn't honestly likely  to suddenly change your entire mindset and makeup, turning you into a killer. 
 
Trust me - there's been more times than I care to count when I've contemplated the havok I could (quite easily) wreck being a firearms owner.  (I specify "firearms" rather than "gun" because I own both handguns and rifles.)  And yet, shooting someone is Not the first means of their demise that comes to mind when I get pissed off at someone else's actions.  Strangulation, beating them with a 2x4 until unconscious and then inflicting the "death of 1000 cuts," smothering with a pillow,  rocking them to sleep (with a 10lb rock, mind you) and then tossing them into a lake as fishfood (with the rock still attached); stabbing them so many times it looks like someone was playing "connect the dots" with their internal organs - those are what come to mind.  I still have yet to kill anyone.
 
(unless, of course, you happen to count the deaths of various characters in RPGs)

_____________________________

Rhi
Light travels faster than sound, which is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.
Essential Scentsations

(in reply to cadenas)
Profile   Post #: 42
RE: 2nd Amendment and Strict Constructionists - 10/8/2009 1:38:23 PM   
Kirata


Posts: 15477
Joined: 2/11/2006
From: USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: cadenas

But at the same time we'd need strict border control checks between Vermont and New York to prevent introducing guns into states that chose to take a different approach.

Yes, that would prevent guns from getting in. Heh. Good luck with that. But more to the point, essentially then you're fine with prohibition if the people of a state want it. No guns? Fine. No booze? What else? Mexicans? Jews? You got a line here somewhere? If it's okay for them to toss the 2nd Amendment into the garbage, what about the 1st Amendment? How about the 5th? Hello?

Just sayin...

K.





< Message edited by Kirata -- 10/8/2009 1:41:20 PM >

(in reply to cadenas)
Profile   Post #: 43
RE: 2nd Amendment and Strict Constructionists - 10/8/2009 1:44:58 PM   
tazzygirl


Posts: 37833
Joined: 10/12/2007
Status: offline 		They tried that with prohibition. Didnt work. Its almost impossible to take away a "right" once its granted. Too many would rebel against having to give up their gun rights. And i would agree with them. Outlaw guns and the dealers and buyers will go underground. Plus it would no way deter those who use them for harm, because, they dont buy guns in the traditional ways.

_____________________________

Telling me to take Midol wont help your butthurt.
RIP, my demon-child 5-16-11
Duchess of Dissent 1
Dont judge me because I sin differently than you.
If you want it sugar coated, dont ask me what i think! It would violate TOS.

(in reply to Kirata)
Profile   Post #: 44
RE: 2nd Amendment and Strict Constructionists - 10/8/2009 1:53:26 PM   
Marc2b


Posts: 6660
Joined: 8/7/2006
Status: offline
quote:

My individual right to live as a free man is absolute. A weapon that is at least as good as my enemy, real or perceived, is necessary to protect that freedom. My rights are NOT granted to me by the state, but by God, or at least my mom and dad. You cannot take that from me.

So fuck your gun laws.


RIGHT ON!

I particularly applaud your recognition that the Constitution is not the source of our rights. I feel like cringing every time I hear somebody say "the Constitution gives us the right to..."

Wrong, folks!

The Constitution does not give us our rights. Our rights are inherent. The purpose of the Constitution is to protect our rights from government.


_____________________________

Do you know what the most awesome thing about being an Atheist is? You're not required to hate anybody!

(in reply to TheIronHorse)
Profile   Post #: 45
RE: 2nd Amendment and Strict Constructionists - 10/8/2009 1:58:31 PM   
Marc2b


Posts: 6660
Joined: 8/7/2006
Status: offline
quote:

Then I read posts like this, think about the poster having one or more firearms and start to understand the "ban the guns" efforts.


What is it about his post that makes you nervous?

It is a little strident perhaps but stridency doesn't automatically translate to "nut case."


_____________________________

Do you know what the most awesome thing about being an Atheist is? You're not required to hate anybody!

(in reply to SpinnerofTales)
Profile   Post #: 46
RE: 2nd Amendment and Strict Constructionists - 10/8/2009 1:59:33 PM   
tazzygirl


Posts: 37833
Joined: 10/12/2007
Status: offline 		i dunno.. i think the "fuck your gun laws" may be a bit unsettling.

_____________________________

Telling me to take Midol wont help your butthurt.
RIP, my demon-child 5-16-11
Duchess of Dissent 1
Dont judge me because I sin differently than you.
If you want it sugar coated, dont ask me what i think! It would violate TOS.

(in reply to Marc2b)
Profile   Post #: 47
RE: 2nd Amendment and Strict Constructionists - 10/8/2009 2:09:31 PM   
SpinnerofTales


Posts: 1586
Joined: 5/30/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Marc2b



What is it about his post that makes you nervous?

It is a little strident perhaps but stridency doesn't automatically translate to "nut case."


When someone starts talking about the fact that God gave him the right to carry loaded firearms, I start to get a little edgy. Who knows if he thinks God is actually talking to him and telling him so? And who knows what he will tell him to do next?

(in reply to Marc2b)
Profile   Post #: 48
RE: 2nd Amendment and Strict Constructionists - 10/8/2009 2:31:43 PM   
Kirata


Posts: 15477
Joined: 2/11/2006
From: USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: SpinnerofTales

Who knows if he thinks God is actually talking to him and telling him so? And who knows what he will tell him to do next?

Nobody. So the question is, why does that looney idea occur to you?

What, umm, do you think God might tell him to do next?

(Hold on, let me start the tape.)

K.




< Message edited by Kirata -- 10/8/2009 2:54:12 PM >

(in reply to SpinnerofTales)
Profile   Post #: 49
RE: 2nd Amendment and Strict Constructionists - 10/8/2009 2:39:08 PM   
Thunderbird56


Posts: 87
Joined: 11/19/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: cadenas

quote:

ORIGINAL: Thunderbird56
The road to hell is paved with good intentions. That's what all of you advocating "reasonable" firearms restrictions are trying to accomplish ... you're trying to prevent something bad from happening. I concur with the sentiment, but the result is often not what you anticipated or expected. Prohibition doesn't work. Period. It didn't work with alcohol, it isn't working with drugs, gambling, or prostitution and it won't work with guns ... no matter how much you want it to.


Ummmm... you mention reasonable restrictions, and then use the most UNreasonable restriction of Prohibition as an example?

Reasonable restrictions are the equivalent to drunk-driving laws, which HAVE reduced deaths tremendously (even though they are still sometimes broken, drunk driving is way down since DUI laws were introduced).




I consider all prohibition laws to be UNreasonable. Drunk driving laws are not a "prohibition" ... they don't forbid you from drinking, they merely forbid you from driving while doing so. Just like it should not be illegal to own a full-auto firearm, but it should be illegal to go on a rampage and kill people with it. The distinction is not subtle.

Now, tell me please, which of the "reasonable" firearms laws you support are not prohibitive? Felons can't own guns? That's a direct prohibition to that person. If he's done his time, paid his debt and deemed safe to re-enter society (if not, why is he being released?) why should he not have the same right to protect himself and his family as you do? By the way, I have friends that are cops that agree with me on this point.



(in reply to cadenas)
Profile   Post #: 50
RE: 2nd Amendment and Strict Constructionists - 10/8/2009 2:48:29 PM   
tazzygirl


Posts: 37833
Joined: 10/12/2007
Status: offline
quote:

it should not be illegal to own a full-auto firearm


People own guns for many reasons.

The beauty, the historic value, the ability to hunt, the desire to go to a target range, something inherited, even the value of some guns are a good reason to own and collect

beyond job requirements, what good reason would anyone have to own a full-auto firearm?

_____________________________

Telling me to take Midol wont help your butthurt.
RIP, my demon-child 5-16-11
Duchess of Dissent 1
Dont judge me because I sin differently than you.
If you want it sugar coated, dont ask me what i think! It would violate TOS.

(in reply to Thunderbird56)
Profile   Post #: 51
RE: 2nd Amendment and Strict Constructionists - 10/8/2009 2:50:26 PM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline
quote:

it should not be illegal to own a full-auto firearm


get a FFLC, you're good to go.

Ron

_____________________________

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


(in reply to tazzygirl)
Profile   Post #: 52
RE: 2nd Amendment and Strict Constructionists - 10/8/2009 3:04:20 PM   
SpinnerofTales


Posts: 1586
Joined: 5/30/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata

Nobody. So the question is, why does that looney idea occur to you?


Maybe it was the idea that the owning and carrying of loaded firearms is a devine right decreed by God gave me the idea?

(in reply to Kirata)
Profile   Post #: 53
RE: 2nd Amendment and Strict Constructionists - 10/8/2009 3:54:52 PM   
Thunderbird56


Posts: 87
Joined: 11/19/2005
Status: offline
quote:

it should not be illegal to own a full-auto firearm


People own guns for many reasons.

The beauty, the historic value, the ability to hunt, the desire to go to a target range, something inherited, even the value of some guns are a good reason to own and collect

beyond job requirements, what good reason would anyone have to own a full-auto firearm?


Tazzy, that "good reason" is not for you or me to decide or determine for someone else. Personally, I can see no "good reason" in owning a 4000 pound albino elephant ... but to prohibit me from owning one just because I *might* go crazy and stampede it down Main Street to kill people is not a valid reason.

Consider that the Swiss have never been invaded. They are a neutral country, and certainly their topography plays a roll, but one of the major factors is that nearly every Swiss household owns a machine gun! Although surrounded on all sides in 2 world wars they were left completely alone because of it.

(in reply to tazzygirl)
Profile   Post #: 54
RE: 2nd Amendment and Strict Constructionists - 10/8/2009 3:59:31 PM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline 		no, it was wasn't machine guns did that, they did not fuck in internal affairs of other countries, and made no bones about they would not involve themselves in wars, and did not (had hitler got everyone else he would have owned the swiss as well, but they were low priority) and prior to that, before airware it was the fact that they are surrounded by mountains. Being in the modern world and living in the valley, they occupy the worst possible military position........look up JohnWarrens latest post.

Ron

_____________________________

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


(in reply to Thunderbird56)
Profile   Post #: 55
RE: 2nd Amendment and Strict Constructionists - 10/8/2009 4:08:47 PM   
DomKen


Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline 		Food for thought I hope:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/33220258/ns/us_news-crime_and_courts/

(in reply to mnottertail)
Profile   Post #: 56
RE: 2nd Amendment and Strict Constructionists - 10/8/2009 4:12:50 PM   
Thadius


Posts: 5091
Joined: 10/11/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

quote:

it should not be illegal to own a full-auto firearm


People own guns for many reasons.

The beauty, the historic value, the ability to hunt, the desire to go to a target range, something inherited, even the value of some guns are a good reason to own and collect

beyond job requirements, what good reason would anyone have to own a full-auto firearm?



Evening tazzy,

To answer your question, with a question...

What good reason would anybody have to own a vehicle that can travel faster than the highest posted speed limit? Lambo, Ferrari, Corvette??? Don't more people die from motor vehicle related accidents than firearms?

quote:


National Vital Statistics Report, Vol. 50, No. 15, September 16, 2002

Motor Vehicle Accidents - 43,354 or 1.8% of all deaths for all ages
Firearms - 28,663 or 1.2% of all deaths for all ages

NOTE: Firearms Statistics Include Gang Warfare, Self Defense Shootings and Criminals Killed by Police





Just something to think about.

I wish you well,
Thadius

_____________________________

When the character of a man is not clear to you, look at his friends." ~ Japanese Proverb

(in reply to tazzygirl)
Profile   Post #: 57
RE: 2nd Amendment and Strict Constructionists - 10/8/2009 4:12:53 PM   
tazzygirl


Posts: 37833
Joined: 10/12/2007
Status: offline
quote:

Tazzy, that "good reason" is not for you or me to decide or determine for someone else. Personally, I can see no "good reason" in owning a 4000 pound albino elephant ... but to prohibit me from owning one just because I *might* go crazy and stampede it down Main Street to kill people is not a valid reason.


I disagree. It is up to us to decide of the reason is "good enough". In much the same way ignorance of a law isnt a good defence, the reason of.. because I want too... isnt a good reason.

_____________________________

Telling me to take Midol wont help your butthurt.
RIP, my demon-child 5-16-11
Duchess of Dissent 1
Dont judge me because I sin differently than you.
If you want it sugar coated, dont ask me what i think! It would violate TOS.

(in reply to Thunderbird56)
Profile   Post #: 58
RE: 2nd Amendment and Strict Constructionists - 10/8/2009 4:16:06 PM   
tazzygirl


Posts: 37833
Joined: 10/12/2007
Status: offline 		hi Master Thadius

Cost makes many of those vehicles prohibitive, as i would think rapid fire machine gun costs would as well. But, it is a good question... why? because it makes you feel more manly (not you per se, but a man)? When that car crashes taking out other people, its no different than that high power machine gun. Another tool to end lives because of someone's misuse.

Unlike that machine gun.. when that corvette, lambo, ferrari are stolen, they are immediately reported as stolen... the guns... not so much.

tazzy

< Message edited by tazzygirl -- 10/8/2009 4:17:19 PM >

_____________________________

Telling me to take Midol wont help your butthurt.
RIP, my demon-child 5-16-11
Duchess of Dissent 1
Dont judge me because I sin differently than you.
If you want it sugar coated, dont ask me what i think! It would violate TOS.

(in reply to Thadius)
Profile   Post #: 59
RE: 2nd Amendment and Strict Constructionists - 10/8/2009 4:20:14 PM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl
Unlike that machine gun.. when that corvette, lambo, ferrari are stolen, they are immediately reported as stolen... the guns... not so much.

tazzy


Those that can own a machine gun have 24 hours from time of discovery to report it to the ATF. And the ATF would be more than looking askance if you had not reported it to the local police immediately.

Ron

_____________________________

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


(in reply to tazzygirl)
Profile   Post #: 60
Page:   <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: 2nd Amendment and Strict Constructionists Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   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