Discussion: The Second Amendment

[Kelly]

*copies and prints photo* *drives to the post office*

 

[Tron5000]

*copies and prints photo* *drives to the post office*

Can you put my picture on a box of milk? Preferably with a web site directing people toward my Tron-Is-Going-Back-To-School-And-Needs-Some-Loot Fund.

 

[Franklin Richards]

I love this cartoon.


[YT]UVV3Bn5G6lg&hl=en[/YT]

 

[Handsome Rob]

No matter what happens, we need to understand 2 thing.

2) it is going to take sometime, atleast a decade, befopre you expirience any major effects; however once their there, they are there for good. i.e. if we ban handguns tomorrow, criminals will still be getting them. The deal is though, over time, the years of nothing being to purchase wil make em hard to get. That's all.

God the people who say we're better off with anybody owning a gun...I wonder who the hell they know; I know FARRRRRR too many people I would never trust with a gun.

1. I disagree. Marijuana has been banned for decades, and it's still easy to get (from what I hear . . . don't smoke it, myself ).

2. You need to get to know some different people. I don't know any firearms owners that I don't feel comfortable around when they're handling guns.

 

[SuBe]

2) it is going to take sometime, atleast a decade, befopre you expirience any major effects; however once their there, they are there for good. i.e. if we ban handguns tomorrow, criminals will still be getting them. The deal is though, over time, the years of nothing being to purchase wil make em hard to get. That's all.

God the people who say we're better off with anybody owning a gun...I wonder who the hell they know; I know FARRRRRR too many people I would never trust with a gun.

It'll just make it hard to get for the Law Abiding Citizen, Criminals would have a Network Black/Gray Market to get what they want, and be able to use it against a populace that can't get weapons.

 

[Bill]

Hell no; I don't think some of you understand the effects a friggin gun can have until it hits close to home. Hand guns are pointless, and while I know some people are def. responsible enough to have one for security, many arent and their the ones we have to be concerned with. If you want to defend your home with a gun, than buy a riffle. Yeah, a lot of criminals who go break into homes might stil have em, but some of em wouldn't and thats better than nothing; and those ones who dont have one will think twice before trying to rob somebody. Over time, the % of thugs who aint packing would gradually grow, which at this pointr is the best possible scenario as they will never be completely gone even if they are banned.

The main problem with buying a rifle for the purpose of home defense, aside from it being clumsy and awkward to bring into action quickly in close quarters, is that the round travels for miles. Do you want the guy next door to you shooting a rifle in his house and take the chance that the round will go through the walls into your house?

The second problem with your scenario is that criminals don't tend to buy their guns from local gun shops. They get them on the black market. So banning them will effectively take the opportunity of owning one out of the hands of the honest citizen, but will little effect the criminal, who doesn't go through to the normals channels of obtaining them.

 

[Zen]

Excel i completely understand your sentiment.

i do...

the problem is there will always be some sort of weapon. you take guns away and people will have knives, stun guns and whatever else...

i have not seen any evidence that taking guns away reduces violence. if you have any, along with any serious commentary or articles as to why it would intrinsically lower crime i want to see it, because i want that to be the reality...

i want to beleive that guns are the reason people do stupid things, but right now i happen to think its people who do them, and despite guns making it more possible, i do not think people will be swayed from doing the destructive objectives they have in their minds, if they dont have a gun.


the second guns are banned, and someone breaks into my home and has one... its all over, the point is lost...

now, as for anything over shotguns and hunting rifles...

such as semi-automatic rifles and any other over the top high powered rifles, people who brandish those now are simply caught up in owning guns and are not serious about protection. if they were they would learn how to shoot a shotgun or rifle... extremely well. not have assault weapons, think they are safe cause its mega powerfull. go to the range a few times and think they know what they are doing. they are the ones half likely to kill their own family members by crossfire.

after proper gun training there is absolutely no reason for assault weapons other than ego and clinical paranoia.

handguns are tough, im not exactly sure why we need a hand gun... when we could have a shotgun in the home. i would support a hand gun ban if a government could plausibly keep them out of criminals hands... but how would they do that?

 

[Malice]

I dont understand.
Do people not realize.
A BANNING of ..lets say handguns.
Will ONLY hurt the law-abiding people?

If its illegal. Do you think people will stop black market shipping handguns here?

Its just like drugs...its illegal as hell, but I am sure, there is someone within a 1 mile radius I could go buy meth from. Banning regular guns is not the way to solve this.

 

[SuBe]

I dont understand.
Do people not realize.
A BANNING of ..lets say handguns.
Will ONLY hurt the law-abiding people?

If its illegal. Do you think people will stop black market shipping handguns here?

Its just like drugs...its illegal as hell, but I am sure, there is someone within a 1 mile radius I could go buy meth from. Banning regular guns is not the way to solve this.

agreed

 

[Malice]

I wholely admit there is a problem, but the banning of guns is not the issue.

I see more as being a parental problem to be honest.
I am sure, just like the meth issue, if I wanted, if I had a few grand, I could get myself a non-serialized handgun that is not entirely traceable.... (I am not saying I know anything about non-traceable guns...this is just a statement)

Regardless...We all know...handguns are not the problem, its the ******s behind them

 

[Tron5000]

I wholely admit there is a problem, but the banning of guns is not the issue.

I see more as being a parental problem to be honest.
I am sure, just like the meth issue, if I wanted, if I had a few grand, I could get myself a non-serialized handgun that is not entirely traceable.... (I am not saying I know anything about non-traceable guns...this is just a statement)

Regardless...We all know...handguns are not the problem, its the ******s behind them

Guns don't kill people. Bad guys that want to harm you and/or take your stuff with guns kill people.

Unless you kill them first.

 

[Darthphere]

I dont understand.
Do people not realize.
A BANNING of ..lets say handguns.
Will ONLY hurt the law-abiding people?

If its illegal. Do you think people will stop black market shipping handguns here?

Its just like drugs...its illegal as hell, but I am sure, there is someone within a 1 mile radius I could go buy meth from. Banning regular guns is not the way to solve this.

Sure, or do you know?

I wholely admit there is a problem, but the banning of guns is not the issue.

I see more as being a parental problem to be honest.
I am sure, just like the meth issue, if I wanted, if I had a few grand, I could get myself a non-serialized handgun that is not entirely traceable.... (I am not saying I know anything about non-traceable guns...this is just a statement)

Regardless...We all know...handguns are not the problem, its the ******s behind them

Malice is on meth.

 

[hippie_hunter]

Personally I feel that if we allow the government to trample over one part of the Constitutition, then we're setting a precident to allow them to trample over more integral parts of the Constitution. If we allow the government to ban guns who's going to stop them from ruining the freedom to speech? Or our right to vote? Or disband Congress?

The Second Amendment gives us the right to bear arms and it must be respected. For the most part gun control laws just negatively affect law abiding citizens and those who want a gun will get a gun. Get rid of guns, and those who want to commit violent acts will still commit them with knives or some other tool. It's not the guns fault for a person's death in gun violence. A gun doesn't have a mind of its own. It doesn't have any emotion or thinking capacity. We live in a world of free will and the person holding the gun is the one who decided to press the trigger.

What we need to do is reasonable gun control which is already in effect. Restrict certain kinds of weapons to people. There's no reason for us to own a fully automatic AK-47. We shouldn't allow a convicted felon to own a gun, just like we don't let them vote. We should do thorough background checks, maybe even more thorough than we have now. We should require safeties on most firearms. We should require gun safety courses. Reasonable gun control is the key, not something absurd that will not help anything but affect those who are completely abiding by the law.

 

[Malice]

Personally I feel that if we allow the government to trample over one part of the Constitutition, then we're setting a precident to allow them to trample over more integral parts of the Constitution. If we allow the government to ban guns who's going to stop them from ruining the freedom to speech? Or our right to vote? Or disband Congress?

The Second Amendment gives us the right to bear arms and it must be respected. For the most part gun control laws just negatively affect law abiding citizens and those who want a gun will get a gun. Get rid of guns, and those who want to commit violent acts will still commit them with knives or some other tool. It's not the guns fault for a person's death in gun violence. A gun doesn't have a mind of its own. It doesn't have any emotion or thinking capacity. We live in a world of free will and the person holding the gun is the one who decided to press the trigger.

What we need to do is reasonable gun control which is already in effect. Restrict certain kinds of weapons to people. There's no reason for us to own a fully automatic AK-47. We shouldn't allow a convicted felon to own a gun, just like we don't let them vote. We should do thorough background checks, maybe even more thorough than we have now. We should require safeties on most firearms. We should require gun safety courses. Reasonable gun control is the key, not something absurd that will not help anything but affect those who are completely abiding by the law.

Hippy...I agree.

 

[Excel]

1. I disagree. Marijuana has been banned for decades, and it's still easy to get (from what I hear . . . don't smoke it, myself ).

2. You need to get to know some different people. I don't know any firearms owners that I don't feel comfortable around when they're handling guns.

Just cause you dont know em dont mean they dont exist. Drugs are totally-if you have a hand gun and kill someone with it, people will find out.

 

[Matt]

Personally I feel that if we allow the government to trample over one part of the Constitutition, then we're setting a precident to allow them to trample over more integral parts of the Constitution. If we allow the government to ban guns who's going to stop them from ruining the freedom to speech? Or our right to vote? Or disband Congress?

The Second Amendment gives us the right to bear arms and it must be respected. For the most part gun control laws just negatively affect law abiding citizens and those who want a gun will get a gun. Get rid of guns, and those who want to commit violent acts will still commit them with knives or some other tool. It's not the guns fault for a person's death in gun violence. A gun doesn't have a mind of its own. It doesn't have any emotion or thinking capacity. We live in a world of free will and the person holding the gun is the one who decided to press the trigger.

What we need to do is reasonable gun control which is already in effect. Restrict certain kinds of weapons to people. There's no reason for us to own a fully automatic AK-47. We shouldn't allow a convicted felon to own a gun, just like we don't let them vote. We should do thorough background checks, maybe even more thorough than we have now. We should require safeties on most firearms. We should require gun safety courses. Reasonable gun control is the key, not something absurd that will not help anything but affect those who are completely abiding by the law.

Summed up my views just about perfectly.

 

[cerealkiller182]

Personally I feel that if we allow the government to trample over one part of the Constitutition, then we're setting a precident to allow them to trample over more integral parts of the Constitution. If we allow the government to ban guns who's going to stop them from ruining the freedom to speech? Or our right to vote? Or disband Congress?

The Second Amendment gives us the right to bear arms and it must be respected. For the most part gun control laws just negatively affect law abiding citizens and those who want a gun will get a gun. Get rid of guns, and those who want to commit violent acts will still commit them with knives or some other tool. It's not the guns fault for a person's death in gun violence. A gun doesn't have a mind of its own. It doesn't have any emotion or thinking capacity. We live in a world of free will and the person holding the gun is the one who decided to press the trigger.

What we need to do is reasonable gun control which is already in effect. Restrict certain kinds of weapons to people. There's no reason for us to own a fully automatic AK-47. We shouldn't allow a convicted felon to own a gun, just like we don't let them vote. We should do thorough background checks, maybe even more thorough than we have now. We should require safeties on most firearms. We should require gun safety courses. Reasonable gun control is the key, not something absurd that will not help anything but affect those who are completely abiding by the law.

well said sir

 

[Venom'sDad]

I believe that the 2nd Amendmant Guarentees your right to carry and own a Firearm. This was intentionally put into the Bill of Rights to keep the Government in Check. If we loose this right, it is a loss of all Rights. I believe that if you are convicted of a Violent Crime, you willfully gave up your right to own and carry a Firearm.

Exactly... just look at how the citizens of Tibet are helpless against China.

I completely disagree... there is nothing in the Constitution that says felons automatic lose their right to carry a firearm. That's just your opinion, whichis no better than those who wish to outlaw all together the right to cary and own firearms.

 

[The Senator]

Exactly... just look at how the citizens of Tibet are helpless against China.

I completely disagree... there is nothing in the Constitution that says felons automatic lose their right to carry a firearm. That's just your opinion, whichis no better than those who wish to outlaw all together the right to cary and own firearms.

If you've committed a felony, you've committed a serious crime. And if you've committed a felony which resulted in violent behavior, you've committed a crime which I personally think forfeits your right to own a gun. The Supreme Court is currently deliberating over the right to own a handgun, and the one things which many agree will come out of the verdict is that, while the Constitution allows us the right to own such a weapon, the government has the ability to control guns as long as it doesn't ban them across the board.

I'm torn as to whether these laws should cover all felons, or those who committed a felony using weapons. Obviously, if you embezzled money, there isn't a reason to suspect that you'll go on a killing spree. But if you held a convenient store hostage, then I personally think it's totally uncalled for to allow that convicted criminal the ability to carry a handgun. Once you've showed us that you can't use the weapon responsibly, then why should we trust you to carry the same weapon in the future?

Besides, allowing violent felons access to a handgun even goes against the NRA's ideology. From what I know, the NRA believes that responsible individuals deserve access to firearms, and they've spoken out in favor of laws which would restrict access to violent felons, as well as those with a history of mental illness.

 

[cerealkiller182]

^^^seconded

 

[Excel]

A friend of mine shot themselves early yesterday morning, got me thinking about how obnoxiously high a the suicide rate would be if everybody did have a gun of their own.

 

[Tron5000]

A friend of mine shot themselves early yesterday morning, got me thinking about how obnoxiously high a the suicide rate would be if everybody did have a gun of their own.

I'm sorry to hear about your friend. That truly is very sad. Prayers with you and everyone affected by this.

 

[jaguarr]

Personally I feel that if we allow the government to trample over one part of the Constitutition, then we're setting a precident to allow them to trample over more integral parts of the Constitution. If we allow the government to ban guns who's going to stop them from ruining the freedom to speech? Or our right to vote? Or disband Congress?

The Second Amendment gives us the right to bear arms and it must be respected. For the most part gun control laws just negatively affect law abiding citizens and those who want a gun will get a gun. Get rid of guns, and those who want to commit violent acts will still commit them with knives or some other tool. It's not the guns fault for a person's death in gun violence. A gun doesn't have a mind of its own. It doesn't have any emotion or thinking capacity. We live in a world of free will and the person holding the gun is the one who decided to press the trigger.

What we need to do is reasonable gun control which is already in effect. Restrict certain kinds of weapons to people. There's no reason for us to own a fully automatic AK-47. We shouldn't allow a convicted felon to own a gun, just like we don't let them vote. We should do thorough background checks, maybe even more thorough than we have now. We should require safeties on most firearms. We should require gun safety courses. Reasonable gun control is the key, not something absurd that will not help anything but affect those who are completely abiding by the law.

I know there are certain states that require gun owners to complete a gun safety course (Connecticut comes to mind) for first time firearm owners. I'd like to see all the states implement something like that. I also agreed very strongly with the five day waiting period provision of the Brady Act, but not all states continue to have a waiting period since that provision expired which I think is a mistake. Nobody needs to purchase a gun RIGHT NOW. They can plan ahead and wait for the background checks to clear.

jag

 

[jaguarr]

A friend of mine shot themselves early yesterday morning, got me thinking about how obnoxiously high a the suicide rate would be if everybody did have a gun of their own.

I'm sorry to hear about your friend, Excel. My condolences to their friends and family (for those that are left behind are the ones that truly suffer). But if they didn't shoot themselves, they'd have drank poison. If they didn't do that, they'd cut their wrists lengthwise and lay in a tub of hot water. If they didn't do that, they'd jump off a tall building. If they didn't do that, they'd throw themselves in front of a fast moving bus or train. People who really want to kill themselves (or someone else) are going to find a way to do it. Period.

jag

 

[Tron5000]

I know there are certain states that require gun owners to complete a gun safety course (Connecticut comes to mind) for first time firearm owners. I'd like to see all the states implement something like that. I also agreed very strongly with the five day waiting period provision of the Brady Act, but not all states continue to have a waiting period since that provision expired which I think is a mistake. Nobody needs to purchase a gun RIGHT NOW. They can plan ahead and wait for the background checks to clear.

jag

Are you referring to a safety course required to simply own a gun, or for a permit to carry? I know here in GA, a course is required for neither, whereas in VA, you can own a gun, but a safety course is required for a concealed-carry permit.

I'm all for a waiting period on guns as well as a safety course as a requirement for a concealed-carry permit. Not sure about a safety course simply to possess a gun in your home.