Discussion: The Second Amendment

[chaseter]

Who said you were wrong?

 

[justinlancaster]

No-- drunk, irrational college students will be able to receive a conceal-carry permit and get a hold of guns, regardless of the processes they are forced to endure. Why? Because there will always, always, always be some moronic owner of a gun shop or some crazed public bureaucrat who feels the need to dance around laws and regulations because it is our God-given right to own dangerous weaponry. That's what happened with Virginia Tech; the assailant didn't receive a proper background check because the man in charge of the store was a self-righteous buffoon. If someone with such a blatant case of psychological illness was able to purchase several guns, then I can only imagine your "average college student" would be able to do so in a heartbeat.

-All those drunk irrational college students that commit crimes and shoot people usually don't go through the trouble of going to a gun shop, receiving a background check, spending hours passing a CCW course and then applying for said CCW permit. I imagine if they were drunk and irrational they would buy the gun on the street and then kill someone. I don't know maybe I'm wrong, but doing all the tasks in the former part of this paragraph seem like something a responsible law abiding citizen would do.

 

[SentinelMind]

Bypass was a wrong choice of words, but I see absolutely no reason why the right to bear arms means you have the right to own ammunition. Given the amount of gun violence in this country, I don't see any reason why someone can go down to their local Big 5 and get ammunition for a gun that can take another person's life. You can have your gun for all I care. That's fine and dandy. But I don't see why you should need to fire that gun.

So you want people to have right to own a useless weapon?

Cities like DC have had handgun bans for decades and both their murder rate and raw number of murder have increased.

I beleive people should have reasonable ability to defend themselves and their own property as stated by Second Amendment.

 

[SuperFerret]

Who said you were wrong?

Obviously I am, because I don't like guns, and I don't have an "informed" opinion about them because I would never touch one unless my life depended on it. I'm not going to argue this anymore, because I'm going to look like a hypocrite, because I have a collection of swords, dulled swords, but swords nonetheless. Yes, they're weapons, but they're also display pieces. Okay, maybe I misspoke when I made the screwdriver comparison, I'll admit it.

 

[SentinelMind]

I'm one of the members of the camp that wouldn't care if they just banned guns all together.

What's the point?! There's been too many kids die from getting ahold of parents guns and shooting themselves because they think it's a toy or children taking them to school and shooting up half of the student body.

Just because some kids/families are not responsible with use the weapons doesn't mean everyone in the country should be banned from using it. Vast majority fo guns owners use their guns responsibly, its only the accidents that make the news. They shouldn't be punished and left defenseless due to carelessness of the few.

Furthermore, look at DC which had a hand guns ban for decades...murder rate went up during those years. Because criminals know people are defenseless.

 

[justinlancaster]

Obviously I am, because I don't like guns, and I don't have an "informed" opinion about them because I would never touch one unless my life depended on it. I'm not going to argue this anymore, because I'm going to look like a hypocrite, because I have a collection of swords, dulled swords, but swords nonetheless. Yes, they're weapons, but they're also display pieces. Okay, maybe I misspoke when I made the screwdriver comparison, I'll admit it.

-I respect your right to dislike guns and never want to pick one up. Please respect my right to own a gun and defend myself if need be.

 

[SuperFerret]

-I respect your right to dislike guns and never want to pick one up. Please respect my right to own a gun and defend myself if need be.

Fine, as I said, I know that banning guns is unrealistic. I'm for stricter gun control laws (it's one of the few political causes I actually feel strongly about, apparently), that's all.

I apologize for losing it a little, I've got a lot of stress, and when that happens I don't choose my words well, and then they get turned on me and it just perpetuates the stress. I kinda from time to time. No harm intended.

 

[justinlancaster]

Fine, as I said, I know that banning guns is unrealistic. I'm for stricter gun control laws (it's one of the few political causes I actually feel strongly about, apparently), that's all.

I apologize for losing it a little, I've got a lot of stress, and when that happens I don't choose my words well, and then they get turned on me and it just perpetuates the stress. I kinda from time to time. No harm intended.

-Its cool. Thing is, is that I live in California and have about 1/3 of the choices that people in states like Nevada and Arizona have when it comes to firearms and they are always adding restrictions every year. Even though they keep adding restrictions, crime just keeps getting worse. What I have come to notice is that people who are strongly against firearms don't have any experience with them what so ever. Its their choice if they want to handle a firearm or own a firearm or be disgusted with them. Thing is I don't have that choice when people start harping on more gun control. I have done nothing wrong so why are my choices being restricted. How about we go after the people that are committing the crimes not the law abiding citizens.

 

[Bill]

I believe that our defense system is so strong, there is no way a group of ordinary citizens can successfully tackle the federal government if it were to somehow enslave us... guns or not... the only way for us to truly defeat the military would be if we had access to nuclear weapons, and frankly, I do not wish to see Bucktooth B. Redneck and his Backwoods Brigade have the liberty to walk into a store and be able to purchase a device which could level the entire NYC metropolitan area ...

That's assuming that every single soldier would be brainless enough to accept orders from a tyrannical government and that every citizen is ordinary.

 

[Bill]

I think it is ridiculous to ban hand guns and single-shot rifles. The former because I believe that the constitution declares that a citizen has the right to protect himself and his property; the latter because hunting is a sport which contributes greatly to local and state economic success. I do, however, believe that ammunition for automatic weapons should be outright banned. There is no rational reason, whatsoever, for a person to own an assault rifle. I believe that the intent of protecting one's life and/ or property should be to maim the assailant, not kill them. As a result, there is no need to use an assault rifle for protection. Furthermore, assault rifles cannot be successfully used as hunting devices considering they severely damage the animal in the process. More often than not, assault rifles have been used to commit murder or have been involved in illegal arms dealings, and I see them more as a burden on our justice system than a benefit.

If someone wants to own an assault rifle simply to have it as a part of their collection, then by all means, they should be able to own one. But ammunition for those weapons should be outright banned, in my opinion, of course.

There is interchangeable ammunition for regular and "assault" rifles. 5.56mm is the .223 and 7.62mm is the .308.

 

[amazingfantasy15]

So it makes more sense for you to just not get a gun and let the man shoot you?

Actually, I believe if someone wants to kill or rob me they're going to do it. I lock my doors at night or when I leave my apartment, but I know a lock won't keep anyone who really wants in, out. I live in a one-bedroom apartment in Chicago, so if I keep gun safely there, there is no way I get the gun loaded before I'm dead. I don't live in fear of that scenario because I know that's the exception not the rule, but I realize it could happen.

If a law abiding citizen wants to own a gun that's fine, that's your right, but I just don't think a gun makes you safe. It's a false sense of security, like the locks on your doors.

 

[The Senator]

-All those drunk irrational college students that commit crimes and shoot people usually don't go through the trouble of going to a gun shop, receiving a background check, spending hours passing a CCW course and then applying for said CCW permit. I imagine if they were drunk and irrational they would buy the gun on the street and then kill someone. I don't know maybe I'm wrong, but doing all the tasks in the former part of this paragraph seem like something a responsible law abiding citizen would do.

Um.... anyone who wants to drive a car will go through driver's ed, state-sponsored courses and take a driver's test in order to receive a license... millions upon millions of people do this each year, and yet, there are still people who get behind the wheel of a car under the influence of alcohol and commit manslaughter... what's to say that even the most well-intentioned individuals with a conceal-carry permit won't make a few bad decisions which end very, very badly?

On college campuses, my bet is that plenty will, given the environment most college students place themselves in...

 

[hammerhedd11]

^ So why not just take away the ability to drive since that also leads to deaths as well?

 

[ChrisBaleBatman]

In the perfect world I'd be all for gun control up the ass. To the tenth degree.

But, we live in a very imperfect world. Many of the people who shouldn't have guns...do. We need to be able to protect ourselves in case the need should arise. And my right to bear a gun should be an option on the table. Not one to be subtracted, especially when you consider the chance that the offender entering said home could be strapped too. I just think that ultimately the baddies almost all have guns, so we should too. Just in case.

 

[Nitehawk013]

Is it not strange that for so many the "perfect world" is extreme regulation of every area of life including complete bans on guns...and they are the ones who are supposed to be liberals I.E favoring more liberty?

And yet with the exception of pretty much just 2 issues, marriage and abortion, the "evil right wing" is perfectly happy with saying we don't want any regualtion. We want smaller Government and less intrusion. Seems to me it is the right that favors more liberty, not the left and their constant cries for more bans, more regulation and more forcing a few peoples opinions on the masses.

 

[Malice]

The problem is...and this is not in gun control....where do we stop.
Two people
1 - Believes all guns are bad, and wants them banned, but wants pot legalized
2 - believes guns are good, and pot is bad.

OK....we have a problem....
I personally believe the govt needs to get out of the business of telling us how to live our lives.

The old saying goes, your rights stop at my nose...

 

[SuBe]

^ So why not just take away the ability to drive since that also leads to deaths as well?

They should just take away our Transfats and Alcohol too. I mean, that could potentially lead to deaths as well. In Fact, we should make Swimming Pools and Beaches illegal too, since people could potentially die there, too.

 

[Nitehawk013]

Yep. Ban it all. If it can hurt anyone anywhere...ban it.

I guess if some freak somewhere enjoys poking himself with sharpened chop sticks, then chop sticks should be banned next because they are a public health problem.

 

[Malice]

Yep. Ban it all. If it can hurt anyone anywhere...ban it.

I guess if some freak somewhere enjoys poking himself with sharpened chop sticks, then chop sticks should be banned next because they are a public health problem.

I tripped on the carpet...ban it!

 

[SuBe]

Tax it, THEN ban it!

 

[Nitehawk013]

Even better!

 

[Spidey-Bat]

Gun control is such a joke. It doesn't work because its target, criminals, are going to get guns anyway. They are criminals; they don't obey laws. That's pretty much why they're criminals.

If you want to ban them b/c of accidental deaths, then we should ban cars and pools.

 

[The Senator]

Cars and pools weren't invented for the sole intention of murdering people, though, so I don't really see how anyone can make the comparison...

 

[ChrisBaleBatman]

Is it not strange that for so many the "perfect world" is extreme regulation of every area of life including complete bans on guns...and they are the ones who are supposed to be liberals I.E favoring more liberty?

Meh.

For me, really...in the perfect world, comeplete gun control would be gurantees that ex-cons couldn't get they're hands on a gun, or drug dealers or mafios couldn't either.

That, clearly is ****ing impossible. So, I say everyone should be able to carry a gun to offset the inbalance.

Ignorant, probably. But, I've got no better idea.

And, as a liberal...the real problem with 100% liberty, is that it'd be chaotic. The strong would eat the weak alive and own everything if we had 100% liberty. Simply because there are people who wish to be civilized and there are those who simply do not. Believe it or not....there are in fact Agents of Chaos in this world. Those are the ones that ultimately make a country with full liberty impossible.

So, we end up having to settle with something of a 80% liberty instead, to keep the crazies in line, basically.

Which is what I think the heart of this debate of gun control is really about.

Yep. Ban it all. If it can hurt anyone anywhere...ban it.

I guess if some freak somewhere enjoys poking himself with sharpened chop sticks, then chop sticks should be banned next because they are a public health problem.

America does have a knack for trying to protect it's morons.....

Like the seat belt law. I mean, we all knew that wearing a seat belt would help save our lives in case of an accident. But, that wasn't enough.

They needed to make a law out of it for the morons who refuse to wear a seat belt. So......in a way, your joke is funny, but sad....because it's kinda true.

Gun control is such a joke. It doesn't work because its target, criminals, are going to get guns anyway. They are criminals; they don't obey laws. That's pretty much why they're criminals.

If you want to ban them b/c of accidental deaths, then we should ban cars and pools.

I'd be fine with manditory gun safety programs or something.

Kinda like the standards for driving a car. Learning how to set the safety, and learning about how to keep it hidden from children at home.

I'd be fine with the education of that type of thing for guns being mandatory if you want to own a gun leagally.

If we're talking about accidental deaths, that is. Clearly the worse has to be the children getting they're hands on guns and firing it accidental death case. Course....when I was a kid, my dad put the fear of God into me for even thinking about looking for his gun in our home.

But I'd be all for a country-wide required saftey class or program where the new gun owner would need to learn these saftey steps.

Again, I understand that some people don't like my opinion of being able to carry guns JUST to protect ourselves...but frankly, as a crazy lefty liberal...I think that's the most important argument gun lovers have in they're holster.

Use it.

 

[Spidey-Bat]

Cars and pools weren't invented for the sole intention of murdering people, though, so I don't really see how anyone can make the comparison...

I'm talking about accidental deaths. People always harp on the number of kids who are killed b/c of guns in the household. Yet no one is moving to ban cars and pools even though more children are killed in car accidents and drown than are killed by guns.

No one is dumb enough to blame cars for motor vehicle deaths; everyone knows it is the individual driving the vehicle. However people blame the gun itself and not the person holding it.