Discussion: The Second Amendment IV

[roach]

Roach, do you mean that you'd just want stringent background checks and psychiatric evaluations prior to gun purchase? I can get on board with that; its silly restrictions on ammunitions and certain models I can't abide.

yes I am all in favor of keeping guns out of nuts hands while not infringing on people's rights.
If I was in charge and it was up to me I would put in place tougher background checks and a mandatory psychological evaluation. Then just like having to renew your driver's license every few years a person would be required to keep a current psychological evaluation on record. This would prevent a sane person from going crazy while owning a fire arm.
To prevent it taking forever for a law abiding citizen getting a fire arm I would create a DMV-type organization to centralize gun permits and psychological evaluations. This would prevent someone from being denied in one state to obtain one in another. I know someone people freaked out when I said a DMV type place but I think it's the only organization that is close to the idea I have. The California DMV employs 9,000 people. All things being equal we are about to drop 450,000 jobs on the economy. That's if we don't up the amount of people we'd need to do all the work (and we'd probably have to). On top of that we are helping the Mental Health community identify people who potentially need help.

 

[enterthemadness]

Cool, if true...only next county over. No, no, two counties over from me.

http://beforeitsnews.com/libertaria...gun-law-nullification-resolution-2480250.html

Beaufort County passes Gun Law Nullification Resolution.

 

[Hotwire]

There will always be people who break laws. Just because there are though doesn't mean the answer is to say, **** it, and do away with laws. We put laws in place as guide lines for what's unacceptable in a civilized society. If you break those laws we as a society punish you, whether that be a fine, or imprisonment. Most of the time the threat is enough to keep most people clean. Those who don't, end up in prison or poor from fines.

It's like saying that people still murder, so screw it, just decriminalize murder. That's not to say I disagree totally with something like ETM's statement. Gov can, and has gotten too big in certain areas. There are certain rights we should fight to keep from getting trampled. The patriot act for one got me up in arms when it came out, so I'd be hypocritical to say otherwise. Some of our taxes are overboard as well. Personally though, I don't see the white houses new gun control ideas as being overboard.

Pretty much.

 

[Hotwire]

Cool, if true...only next county over. No, no, two counties over from me.

http://beforeitsnews.com/libertaria...gun-law-nullification-resolution-2480250.html

Beaufort County passes Gun Law Nullification Resolution.

So, they pretty much just said, we will hereby disobey Federal law and are willing to suffer any Federal punishments you want to give us because, f*** you, that's why.

 

[enterthemadness]

So, they pretty much just said, we will hereby disobey Federal law and are willing to suffer any Federal punishments you want to give us because, f*** you, that's why.

I side with State Law more than Fed Law. Yea, Fed Law trumps all blah blah blah, but with things like drug laws and gun laws, I rather see States handle it.

Although I rather see, say, Weed legalized federally.

Obama. I know what he should do to take heat off this stuff. Make weed legal. Everybody get high and RELAX.

 

[Grievous]

I side with State Law more than Fed Law. Yea, Fed Law trumps all blah blah blah, but with things like drug laws and gun laws, I rather see States handle it.

Although I rather see, say, Weed legalized federally.

Obama. I know what he should do to take heat off this stuff. Make weed legal. Everybody get high and RELAX.

If booze which as been legal for years isn't a federal law don't expect weed to be either.

 

[wiegeabo]

So, they pretty much just said, we will hereby disobey Federal law and are willing to suffer any Federal punishments you want to give us because, f*** you, that's why.

No, basically they're saying "Come at us. We'll sue and let the Supreme Court decide."

Which, every State and locality has the right to do. In fact, it should be encouraged. If you don't like a law, it's your right to fight it. You might lose, but it's still your right to question it and force the law makers to defend it.

 

[SuBe]

It's not just allowing the Supreme Court decide or getting stomped on by the Feds, it's making a spectacle of the situation. It's one thing for a Federal Agent to take down one individual, but try and take down a county, or a state that supports it and you show exactly how Tyrannical you really are.

 

[Optimus_Prime_]

So, they pretty much just said, we will hereby disobey Federal law and are willing to suffer any Federal punishments you want to give us because, f*** you, that's why.

That worked so well during segregation.

 

[Optimus_Prime_]

Personally, I don't think everything should be up to the states. Some things infringe on human rights, and shouldn't be up to argument. Others depend on people not being idiots.

Some drugs cause halucinations that have lead to people eating other people, and killing in general. No amount of education on acid is going to prevent people from tripping out and doing something harmful to themselves, or someone else. Just like no amount of education is going to stop an idiot from getting into his car drunk and killing someone, which is why it's illegal to drive under the influence. While I'm for marijuana legalization, some things are just too harmful to leave it up to the individual. A lot of drug issues don't just affect the one taking them. They lash out at family, do stupid things, and hurt strangers.

Same with seatbelts. There are plenty of parents who think seatbelts are a waste of time and energy, and if it wasn't law would simply leave their children unbuckled. Then they have a wreck, and their child goes flying through the front windshield. Maybe the fine for not having a seatbelt should be lessoned, but if it saves lives, and it's not that big of a deal, then why not?

Legalizing all drugs is bad.

Since alcohol and tobacco are legal it's hard to argue against pot; harder ones, I don't think so.

 

[Holiday]

Some drugs cause halucinations that have lead to people eating other people, and killing in general. No amount of education on acid is going to prevent people from tripping out and doing something harmful to themselves, or someone else. Just like no amount of education is going to stop an idiot from getting into his car drunk and killing someone, which is why it's illegal to drive under the influence. While I'm for marijuana legalization, some things are just too harmful to leave it up to the individual. A lot of drug issues don't just affect the one taking them. They lash out at family, do stupid things, and hurt strangers.

Agreed, which is why I think it's necessary for our government to start cracking down on foods containing refined sugars. They're obviously too addictive and harmful for any individual to consume responsibly, as evident by this country's high obesity rate. Plus, as you pointed out, the addiction can lead to serious family problems as well.

 

[Hotwire]

I really wish it wasn't a movie quote so I wouldn't seem like such a nerd saying but, "You were so preoccupied with whether or not you could that you didn't stop to think if you should." I'm surprised this didn't cause more of a stir with the other shoppers.

Man carries AR-15 strapped to his back into JC Penny to do his shopping.

 

[Grievous]

I'm surprised the other shoppers didn't scream and call for police upon sight. Seeing any gun on someone in a public place like a store who isn't a part of law enforcement is never a claim feeling.

 

[Spider-Who?]

I'm surprised the other shoppers didn't scream and call for police upon sight. Seeing any gun on someone in a public place like a store who isn't a part of law enforcement is never a claim feeling.

He's lucky no one complained. A lot of states would consider it brandishing a weapon (regardless of owning a CCW), which could land him in jail for a spell.

 

[SuBe]

Agreed, which is why I think it's necessary for our government to start cracking down on foods containing refined sugars. They're obviously too addictive and harmful for any individual to consume responsibly, as evident by this country's high obesity rate. Plus, as you pointed out, the addiction can lead to serious family problems as well.

Government should regulate air as well, because 100% of the criminals in prisons today breathe air.

 

[Marvolo]

I'm surprised the other shoppers didn't scream and call for police upon sight. Seeing any gun on someone in a public place like a store who isn't a part of law enforcement is never a claim feeling.

In my state its legal to open carry a pistol on your hip, but the owner of an establishment can ask you to leave. Some people get nervous but firearms are well known in my area so you dont have mass panic. Personally, Ive never open carried because I look younger than I am and dont really have the gravitas to pull it off. Id hate to upset a lady or a child. I do know people that do it tho.

 

[Grievous]

In my state its legal to open carry a pistol on your hip, but the owner of an establishment can ask you to leave. Some people get nervous but firearms are well known in my area so you dont have mass panic. Personally, Ive never open carried because I look younger than I am and dont really have the gravitas to pull it off. Id hate to upset a lady or a child. I do know people that do it tho.

I guess that is where the ''no firearms beyond this point'' sign came from.

 

[Hotwire]

I guess that is where the ''no firearms beyond this point'' sign came from.

Which the banks in Texas have on their doors. Personally, I'd file that under "common sense" but...

 

[Phallic]

Which the banks in Texas have on their doors. Personally, I'd file that under "common sense" but...

If you're referring to banning CCW in banks, why's that?

 

[Hotwire]

If you're referring to banning CCW in banks, why's that?

Come on. Seriously? You don't think carrying a gun into a bank might make people a bit nervous? Unless you're a uniformed security guard, armored car driver, or a cop, you really have no business bringing your gun into the bank with you.

 

[wiegeabo]

so what do you do with it? Leave it in the car?

 

[Hotwire]

so what do you do with it? Leave it in the car?

Probably a good idea.

 

[wiegeabo]

Yep. Leaving it in the car where it can be seen, and stolen, sure sounds like a good idea.

 

[Schlosser85]

Bringing a gun into a bank is just a foolish thing to do.

Think for two seconds and have a shred of common sense.

 

[wiegeabo]

It's a bit of a no-win. Can't take it in, but can't leave it outside.

I guess the solution would be to check the gun inside the bank with a guard.