Discussion: The Second Amendment V

Status
Not open for further replies.
The problem I have, there, is you have anti-gun people who assume pro-gun people want to force them to own guns. That couldn't be further from the truth.

@Doc: I don't think calling certain legislation unconsitutional is indefensible. I do think that calling all GC legislation unconstitutional is indefensible.
 
@Doc: I don't think calling certain legislation unconsitutional is indefensible. I do think that calling all GC legislation unconstitutional is indefensible.
I'm speaking with specific regard to the bill that was put forward (and struck down) just now.
 
I think the gun should be abandon... No one use gun just top yousing gun and I hope you all work together in harmony in US... Abandon gun, stop killing each other...
 
abandoning the gun will not curb a man's desire for violence.
 
Thanks!

That's about what I thought. The reason I asked is because I'm trying to figure out just how gun control legislation can be considered unconstitutional. So many of my friends throw out that term, but I think it's an indefensible position.

It can, but it depends on what you're attempting to legislate.
 
abandoning the gun will not curb a man's desire for violence.

No, it won't. It would make it a bit harder. You can't deny that guns make killing easier. Especially in a "heat of the moment" situation.
 
I was specifically referring to the same bill when I mentioned that calling certain forms of GC unconstitutional is flimsy at best.
 
Thanks!

That's about what I thought. The reason I asked is because I'm trying to figure out just how gun control legislation can be considered unconstitutional. So many of my friends throw out that term, but I think it's an indefensible position.
I wouldn't say that it's an indefensible position, just an ignorant one. While the United States has the most ardent right to bear arms compared to the rest of the world, there is nowhere in the Second Amendment that doesn't bar it from regulation. It's what I told my very pro-gun friend, that the Second Amendment is still subject to regulation the way the First Amendment is, another amendment in which allows the United States to top most countries in terms of certain rights.

That said, I find most gun regulation, even though it is constitutional, to just be a mere placebo that really has no real effectiveness. The only way to curb gun violence in the United States is through confiscation which is indeed unconstitutional and will never happen to begin with.
 
Actually, confiscate the illegal weapons, and shut down the black market weapon dealers/suppliers, and you'll see gun crime drop dramatically. By about 8,000 deaths per year.
 
No, it won't. It would make it a bit harder. You can't deny that guns make killing easier. Especially in a "heat of the moment" situation.

in the "heat of the moment", a man will use anything to murder- a knife, a bat, a pillow, scissors, a piece of glass- anything. taking away one object will only encourage him to go for something else. take away one tool, he will simply go for another tool

like liberals and anti-gun people, you're focusing on the wrong part of the problem. you think simply taking away the tool will solve your problems, when in reality you've done nothing to help the actual problem. the problem is not the tool being used; the REAL problem is why he is committing the crime, the motive behind it, the reason behind it, and how he views life. the real problem lies within the heart of the man.

you work on the heart of the man, he will be less prone to violence.
 
And it's not right to punish law abiding citizens for the acts of criminals.
 
in the "heat of the moment", a man will use anything to murder- a knife, a bat, a pillow, scissors, a piece of glass- anything. taking away one object will only encourage him to go for something else. take away one tool, he will simply go for another tool

like liberals and anti-gun people, you're focusing on the wrong part of the problem. you think simply taking away the tool will solve your problems, when in reality you've done nothing to help the actual problem. the problem is not the tool being used; the REAL problem is why he is committing the crime, the motive behind it, the reason behind it, and how he views life. the real problem lies within the heart of the man.

you work on the heart of the man, he will be less prone to violence.

A pressure cooker????? :dry:
 
like liberals and anti-gun people, you're focusing on the wrong part of the problem. you think simply taking away the tool will solve your problems, when in reality you've done nothing to help the actual problem. the problem is not the tool being used; the REAL problem is why he is committing the crime, the motive behind it, the reason behind it, and how he views life. the real problem lies within the heart of the man.

The problem is what I think would truly fix the gun violence problems would never be passed in the house or senate(basically a better health care system including mental health facilities, programs to lift up the poor, raising taxes to pay for that stuff, creating laws to distribute wealth among all classes better (say like increase min wage to a higher amount, etc))

In the case of wealth distribution I think this graph says it all

http://www2.ucsc.edu/****ulesamerica/power/images/wealth/Actual_estimated_ideal_wealth_distribution.gif
14e6p89.jpg
 
Last edited:
in the "heat of the moment", a man will use anything to murder- a knife, a bat, a pillow, scissors, a piece of glass- anything. taking away one object will only encourage him to go for something else. take away one tool, he will simply go for another tool

like liberals and anti-gun people, you're focusing on the wrong part of the problem. you think simply taking away the tool will solve your problems, when in reality you've done nothing to help the actual problem. the problem is not the tool being used; the REAL problem is why he is committing the crime, the motive behind it, the reason behind it, and how he views life. the real problem lies within the heart of the man.

you work on the heart of the man, he will be less prone to violence.
And you completely gloss over the fact that guns make killing easier! That was my only point. Guns were invented to make it easier to kill things. It's easier for someone to commit murder with a gun than it is any other weapon. It's also easier to commit suicide with a gun, too. That's the point. If yo this about it, a gun is kind of a lazy way to kill anything. Point, squeeze, bang, dead. I can see how it would be a preferred method of killing. Be it murder or hunting.

Look, of course people will still kill if they don't have a gun. I'm just saying it will be harder to do.
 
im not glossing over a thing, and you've completely missed my entire point. my point is that ANYTHING can kill, and one will use anything TO kill. both of us want to stop murder, but if we take your point of view, EVERYTHING that could be used as a weapon will need to be either heavily regulated or banned.

you need to stop treating the symptom, and start treating the problem
 
im not glossing over a thing, and you've completely missed my entire point. my point is that ANYTHING can kill, and one will use anything TO kill. both of us want to stop murder, but if we take your point of view, EVERYTHING that could be used as a weapon will need to be either heavily regulated or banned.

you need to stop treating the symptom, and start treating the problem
First off, I don't want to take away anyone's guns unless they've obtained them illegally. Now, I don't think the general public should have access to military style hardware but, I can understand their infatuation with it. What really gets under my skin is when people take this stance that since regulating guns won't stop murders from happening, then we shouldn't regulate the guns. It's the equivalent of a little kid sticking his fingers in his ears.

Second, you are glossing over the fact that the guns make killing easier. You discard that fact altogether. It's so much easier to kill someone or something when you have a gun. Why do you think so many hunters use them instead of spears? Why do you think more murders are committed using a firearm than all other methods combined? It's easier! It's more convenient! Here's the interesting part. A lot of times, just putting that barrier in the way, deters a lot of people. Take suicides for a minute. In reading an article on cracked.com, I found out some interesting things. Here's some of it.
Cracked.com said:
Bizarrely, the entire gun debate tends to completely ignore two-thirds of the deaths: Gun suicides are almost twice as common as homicides in America (19,392 to 11,078 in 2010). You wouldn't know it, since every murder gets reported on the local news and suicides don't, even though they dwarf murders by a wide margin (maybe even more than the stats say, since loved ones have motivation to cover up suicides). The reasonable person will reply, "But that's not saying anything about guns, Cracked -- if depressed people want to kill themselves, they'll just find another way!"


Actually ... no, they won't. Whether guns are legal or not, whether you believe in gun control or not, here's the most important reason you'll ever hear for not keeping one in your home. It has to do with ovens.


In the first half of the 20th century, ovens in England used to burn coal gas, which happened to be completely lethal in concentrated doses and was thus the preferred way to commit suicide. By the late 1950s, sticking your head in the oven accounted for nearly half of all suicides committed in England. By the early 1970s, these ovens had been phased out, so nobody was surprised to see coal gas fall out of the top ten British suicide methods (one of Cracked.com's least popular recurring articles). So what did all of those suicidal people do instead? In a startling number of cases, they just went right on living. The suicide rate dropped by a third, and it never went back up.


Wait, really? The decision to off yourself is kind of a big one, isn't it? It's not the sort of thing you just wait to do when the opportunity arises and your schedule opens up. Yet you can find plenty of examples of people being inconvenienced right the hell down from the ledge. Adding a suicide barrier to a bridge in Washington lowered not just the number of suicides that occurred on that bridge, but the overall suicide rate (meaning those people didn't just go find another bridge to jump from). A study of more than 500 Golden Gate Bridge jumpers who were stopped in the act found that 94 percent didn't try it again.


Suicides, it turns out, are often split-second decisions -- add even a few minutes' thought or just plain inconvenience to it, and a lot of the victims change their minds. Of course, that's not possible if your method involves instantly splattering your brains all over the wall with one pull of the trigger. If a bridge with a low barrier and a coal gas oven are Regis Philbin asking you to lock in your final answer, having a gun is like the Jeopardy! clicker -- all you have to do is press one button a single time and it's done. No going back. So it's no surprise that one of the biggest risk factors for suicide is simply having a gun in the house.


And nobody wants to talk about it, even though this is twice the problem of all other gun violence combined. Gun suicides kill the equivalent of two Sandy Hook shootings a day. But it's just so goddamn depressing to talk about, so we just ... don't.
So, you have to wonder, if the guns weren't available to the people who want to commit murder, just how many of them would be motivated enough to still go through with it?
 
im not glossing over a thing, and you've completely missed my entire point. my point is that ANYTHING can kill, and one will use anything TO kill. both of us want to stop murder, but if we take your point of view, EVERYTHING that could be used as a weapon will need to be either heavily regulated or banned.

you need to stop treating the symptom, and start treating the problem

Isn't the problem the culture of America and its love affair with firearms? I get it you guys have this constitutional right to defend ones self but as an outsider looking in the problem is kinda simple to rectify. The rest of the world looks at you guys and we cannot believe that paranoia that comes with gun ownership, it's almost as if the US society feels it's constantly under threat from being invaded or something. It's mind boggling, 15 years ago one massacre was all it took for our then conservative government to change the laws, it wasn't popular but it was the moral thing to do. The result is murder decreased significantly over the years, gun related deaths now make up only about 10% of cases nowadays. None of us get why you Americans hold this gun amendment so closely, it was written at a time where the weapons at hand weren't anywhere near what they are today.
 
im not glossing over a thing, and you've completely missed my entire point. my point is that ANYTHING can kill, and one will use anything TO kill. both of us want to stop murder, but if we take your point of view, EVERYTHING that could be used as a weapon will need to be either heavily regulated or banned.

you need to stop treating the symptom, and start treating the problem

Are you denying that it's easier to kill someone with a gun than it is to kill someone with a plank of wood?

Not only that, but it's much easier to kill multiple people with a gun. Do you think Newtown or Columbine of V-Tech would have happened if the assailants were wielding knives?
 
Last edited:
Not only that, but it's much easier to kill multiple people with a gun. Do you think Newtown or Columbine of V-Tech would have happened if the assailants were wielding knives?

Wasn't there somebody in Texas a few weeks back who went on a knife welding spree? 14 injured 0 dead
 
Wasn't there somebody in Texas a few weeks back who went on a knife welding spree? 14 injured 0 dead

Yep, at a community college in Houston...he was bat **** crazy, he carried around a stuffed monkey with him everywhere talking to it...
 
Yep, at a community college in Houston...he was bat **** crazy, he carried around a stuffed monkey with him everywhere talking to it...
If that didn't get someone to notice the guy needed help, then I don't know what else would. Continuous talking to an inanimate object is a sure sign of mental health problems.
 
Yep, at a community college in Houston...he was bat **** crazy, he carried around a stuffed monkey with him everywhere talking to it...

And being in Texas, he could have easily AND LEGALLY purchased a gun and extended magazine. Then it could have easily been 14 dead or more. But, according to many, requiring that background check would never stop him so, we certainly shouldn't put that obstacle in his way.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Staff online

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
202,373
Messages
22,093,766
Members
45,888
Latest member
amyfan32
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"