Page 114 of 117 FirstFirst ... 1464104112113114115116 ... LastLast
Results 1,131 to 1,140 of 1163

Thread: Gun control

  1. #1131
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    10,171
    Quote Originally Posted by 21Kid View Post
    IMO, that Constitutionally granted right needs to be amended. It was written in a different time, with vastly different needs at that time. We didn't have a Trillion dollar army, Armed reserve, Coast Guard, State Police, local police, security guards, etc... at the time to protect us. We don't all need access to AR-15s to protect our country any more. We have enough "protection" that we don't need a well-regulated militia any longer.

    There were quite a few other Constitutionally granted rights from 200+ years ago I'm pretty sure many people agree is better left in the past. Times change... and so should we.


    I know it's not going to happen in 'MERICA!!! But, I think placing limitations on people's access to so many weapons should be a start.
    Yeah.


  2. #1132
    'Trep dodint's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Location
    Hunting for D
    Posts
    2,213
    Quote Originally Posted by 21Kid View Post
    IMO, that Constitutionally granted right needs to be amended. It was written in a different time, with vastly different needs at that time. We didn't have a Trillion dollar army, Armed reserve, Coast Guard, State Police, local police, security guards, etc... at the time to protect us. We don't all need access to AR-15s to protect our country any more. We have enough "protection" that we don't need a well-regulated militia any longer.

    There were quite a few other Constitutionally granted rights from 200+ years ago I'm pretty sure many people agree is better left in the past. Times change... and so should we.


    I know it's not going to happen in 'MERICA!!! But, I think placing limitations on people's access to so many weapons should be a start.
    This is an argument that is at least valid from a Constitutional perspective which is commendable.

    The crux of Heller, though, is that the right to bear arms is protected for home defense. The court interpreted the militia aspect to basically be moot, the Constitution provides for militias in Article 1 Section 8. Because the framers also, on top of that section, included a separate amendment to speak directly to an individuals right to bear arms the current Constitutional treatment doesn't even consider the militia aspect. So in a way, you've actually already achieved what you want. Unfortunately, the right to defend your home is probably an even more difficult hurdle to overcome than the 'but militia' argument. Part of the reason the right to bear arms existed at all in the 1791 was because settlers on the frontier needed them to hunt and defend against neighbors and Native Americans. Arguably that concern is still in play today over 200 years later.

  3. #1133
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    3,251
    I do want tighter gun control laws, but I still think it's wise that our founding father's allowed us the right to bear arms.

    Why? Because sooner or later, our political system will be full of Trumps and Hillarys in all branches of govt and they won't be serving the American people anymore...

    When our votes truly no longer matter, it will take bullets to take back the country. Even if we're no match for the US military, then at least we'd render the evil US regime less effective around the world. Military will also probably split because surely not all of them will blindly listen to the future Trump-like prez's order to kill Americans.

    Imagine if the Nazis had to deal with armed rebels within Germany, surely they won't be able to focus on taking over the world.

    American citizens have a LOT of guns in their hands. It will not be easy for our future evil emperor to crush the resistance... thanks to our right to bear arms.

    Founding father's forsaw what might happen due to our sinful corruptible nature that's why we have so many check and balances in place to prevent things from going wrong. Right to bear arms is probably the very last check and balance the people have...
    Last edited by Crazed_Insanity; November 8th, 2017 at 11:18 AM.

  4. #1134
    Consultant KillerB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Cypress, CA USA
    Posts
    1,108
    Quote Originally Posted by thesameguy View Post
    Man, this type of things definitely reeks of a Federal crime database. I'm not saying it's a bad idea, but in the spirit of Devil's Advocate convincing states much less municipalities to report to a Federal system and then convincing citizens that a national database of people and crimes is a good idea is a tough road to hoe. Like, it probably is a good idea, but fuuuuu. There are like five states that would agree.
    The thing is, this sort of thing already is possible. State boards of nursing conduct state and federal background checks through the FBI. My wife paid $60 for hers (admittedly about 15 years ago) so, contrary to Kidís wishes, it need not be onerously expensive.

    I donít think you need some national crime database, just enough funding to staff up the FBI to conduct timely, thorough (at least as thorough as the ones for nursing licenses) background checks for firearm purchases. Do that plus tie up some loose ends in reporting (both require reporting in some cases where it isnít now, as well as work on compliance where it alread is required) and youíve got something that has high levels of support even among gun owners that will do far more to reduce gun violence than banning semiautomatic rifles.

  5. #1135
    Consultant KillerB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Cypress, CA USA
    Posts
    1,108
    Kid - genuinely curious: what other rights do you think we should no longer have?

  6. #1136
    Bad Taste novicius's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Mad-city
    Posts
    5,358
    To be fair, most other rights can't physically harm nearly 600 people in a single sitting. Just sayin'. #strawman


    EDIT: For clarity. HTH.
    Last edited by novicius; November 8th, 2017 at 01:16 PM.

  7. #1137
    Consultant KillerB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Cypress, CA USA
    Posts
    1,108
    I assume you mean physical harm, because I can harm a hell of a lot more than 600 people in one sitting with the First Amendment. #heresthatstrawmanback

  8. #1138
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    10,171
    Quote Originally Posted by KillerB View Post
    The thing is, this sort of thing already is possible. State boards of nursing conduct state and federal background checks through the FBI. My wife paid $60 for hers (admittedly about 15 years ago) so, contrary to Kid’s wishes, it need not be onerously expensive.

    I don’t think you need some national crime database, just enough funding to staff up the FBI to conduct timely, thorough (at least as thorough as the ones for nursing licenses) background checks for firearm purchases. Do that plus tie up some loose ends in reporting (both require reporting in some cases where it isn’t now, as well as work on compliance where it alread is required) and you’ve got something that has high levels of support even among gun owners that will do far more to reduce gun violence than banning semiautomatic rifles.
    I'm not saying it's not possible - it's totally possible. I'm saying that states rights people are going to oppose any sort of "Federal citizen tracking" endeavor for a myriad of reasons... many of which are similar to the Federal ID objections. I think people think they are a lot more private than they actually are, and don't realize that the difference between a Federal citizen tracking system and Facebook is a lot narrower than they expect. Don't get me wrong, I do think the Feds could readily and easily bungle this type of project, and there are lots of ways for it to go wrong or be abused, BUT that the objections people generally have to trying are seriously lacking in creativity.

    Balancing states' rights and a country's needs sucks.

  9. #1139
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    10,171
    Quote Originally Posted by novicius View Post
    To be fair, most other rights can't harm nearly 600 people in a single sitting. Just sayin'. #strawman
    While watching The Purge: Election Day last night I thought it was silly that nobody in this fanciful future had purged using ricin or a homemade fuel/air or hydrogen bomb. :shrug:

  10. #1140
    'Trep dodint's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Location
    Hunting for D
    Posts
    2,213
    Quote Originally Posted by novicius View Post
    To be fair, most other rights can't physically harm nearly 600 people in a single sitting. Just sayin'. #strawman


    EDIT: For clarity. HTH.
    Honestly have no idea what you're talking about. Jonestown?

    Hyperbole like this pushed out well thought opinions.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •