Lets just keep it rolling
[quote]IMO, of course, the best gun regulation as how it was intended and the denotation at the time of the writing of the Bill of Rights.
As in well regulated = well trained in use of. IE: rather than national registries, which people are deluding yourself if you don’t think they already have, mag limits and making sure the weapon doesn’t look scary… How about we teach people how to handle a firearm, respect a firearm and how not ot be douchebags…[/quote]
I agree with this. However CERTAIN citizens should never have access to a firearm. I have an amazing cousin who was born severely mentally retarded (before the PC police I still think that is the official term in Kansas, not mentally challenged but I digress). He should not only never own a firearm, but never have ACCESS to one.
I just happen to think his loving parents who do a great job are the ones responsible for making sure that happens. The government MAYBE in cases where good parents aren’t around. They should be the very last people to work on those things. I have no idea where that distinction comes in, but in the vast vast majority of cases (trying to think of exceptions) the government should stay out of it. In fact I’m not even sure if I can come up with something that they should step up.
IMO.
[quote]H factor wrote:
[quote]IMO, of course, the best gun regulation as how it was intended and the denotation at the time of the writing of the Bill of Rights.
As in well regulated = well trained in use of. IE: rather than national registries, which people are deluding yourself if you don’t think they already have, mag limits and making sure the weapon doesn’t look scary… How about we teach people how to handle a firearm, respect a firearm and how not ot be douchebags…[/quote]
I agree with this. However CERTAIN citizens should never have access to a firearm. [/quote]
certainly agree, but it is hard to come to the conclusion proactively without endangering the rights of everyone.
Sort of like saying “Johnny over there comes from a long line of drunks, so it is likely he will be a drunk, and therefore shouldn’t ever be given a driver’s license.”
I get what you are saying, there are people that are just “broken” (that isn’ an insult) and should be limited in their ability to handle a firearm due to lack of judgment, etc. But finding the line of who is and isn’t that type of person is hard.
I don’t want doctor’s getting involved, because then people who just need to talk to someone won’t go get help, because he knows the doctor will tell the state, and he’ll lose his rights…
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]H factor wrote:
[quote]IMO, of course, the best gun regulation as how it was intended and the denotation at the time of the writing of the Bill of Rights.
As in well regulated = well trained in use of. IE: rather than national registries, which people are deluding yourself if you don’t think they already have, mag limits and making sure the weapon doesn’t look scary… How about we teach people how to handle a firearm, respect a firearm and how not ot be douchebags…[/quote]
I agree with this. However CERTAIN citizens should never have access to a firearm. [/quote]
certainly agree, but it is hard to come to the conclusion proactively without endangering the rights of everyone.
Sort of like saying “Johnny over there comes from a long line of drunks, so it is likely he will be a drunk, and therefore shouldn’t ever be given a driver’s license.”
I get what you are saying, there are people that are just “broken” (that isn’ an insult) and should be limited in their ability to handle a firearm due to lack of judgment, etc. But finding the line of who is and isn’t that type of person is hard.
I don’t want doctor’s getting involved, because then people who just need to talk to someone won’t go get help, because he knows the doctor will tell the state, and he’ll lose his rights…[/quote]
I don’t either, but the idea that EVERYONE should have access to firearms is crazy and I’m a huge 2nd amendment guy. My cousin (who could never be taught HOW to use a gun) should not have a gun.
Now I think society is best at determining that (he has loving parents who would never let him have a gun in the first place) but no not everyone should have a gun. Everyone should have the right to have a gun IF they can handle it properly. My cousin cannot (he doesn’t even want to of course for obvious reasons he doesn’t know what a gun is).
[quote]H factor wrote:
I don’t either, but the idea that EVERYONE should have access to firearms is crazy and I’m a huge 2nd amendment guy. My cousin (who could never be taught HOW to use a gun) should not have a gun. [/quote]
-Not everyone will have access to firearms(too poor, parents/guardians won’t allow, etc.), but it is not necessary to legislate who can and can’t have them. Heck, there are even gun dealers who refuse to sell to certain people on occasion.
-x2!
-Who determines this?
-Then why allow the existence of laws(which will only lead to more and stricter laws) that are not necessary(by your own admission, your cousin would not own a gun)?
Question 1. Kryptonite must be regulated by the government, because:
a. long term exposure can cause radiation poisoning in humans.
b. it kills all plant life.
c. it can cause paranoid delusions
d. this is a trick question. Kryptonite is a nonissue-it does not exist; therefore, it does not need to be regulated.
[quote]NickViar wrote:
-Not everyone will have access to firearms(too poor, parents/guardians won’t allow, etc.), but it is not necessary to legislate who can and can’t have them. Heck, there are even gun dealers who refuse to sell to certain people on occasion.
[/quote]
What world do you live in? There are people, children, in Africa who are poorer than dirt who have AKs. There are kids in inner cities who are poor yet they get their hands on guns, at a higher price than they sell legally no less. Yes, let’s not have legislation or regulations and that 12 year old can save money by simply buying a gun legally. He can then kill someone with it and then, then, we’ll do something since even in your world murder is against the law (I assume). In the meantime every other 12 year old decides they also need a gun, since every other 12 year old has one, and Detroit makes Fallujah look like Greenwich, CT.
[quote]zecarlo wrote:
There are kids in inner cities who are poor yet they get their hands on guns, at a higher price than they sell legally no less. [/quote]
-Excellent point. I guess it is best that only those willing to break the law have the ability to defend themselves. You don’t want to risk being throw in prison? Good. Now rely on government, which has failed to legislate guns out of the hands of those willing to break the law, to protect you.
Your whole post is an admission that government is unable to keep guns out of the hands of those willing to break the law.
[quote]zecarlo wrote:
Yes, let’s not have legislation or regulations and that 12 year old can save money by simply buying a gun legally. [/quote]
Your own post states the regulation and legislation doesn’t prevent it from happening.
Legislation doesn’t stop 12 year olds form banging heroin either…
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]zecarlo wrote:
Yes, let’s not have legislation or regulations and that 12 year old can save money by simply buying a gun legally. [/quote]
Your own post states the regulation and legislation doesn’t prevent it from happening.
Legislation doesn’t stop 12 year olds form banging heroin either…[/quote]
No, you are wrong. My post states that it will be even easier for kids to buy guns and they won’t even have to worry about keeping the fact they are armed a secret. Imagine if you were a teacher and you had a class full of armed 12 year olds. Imagine a school full of armed kids.
[quote]NickViar wrote:
Your whole post is an admission that government is unable to keep guns out of the hands of those willing to break the law.
[/quote]
You think that was clever but not everyone is willing to break the law. This wouldn’t be against the law so even those who were not willing to break the law would end up armed.
[quote]zecarlo wrote:
[quote]NickViar wrote:
Your whole post is an admission that government is unable to keep guns out of the hands of those willing to break the law.
[/quote]
You think that was clever but not everyone is willing to break the law. This wouldn’t be against the law so even those who were not willing to break the law would end up armed. [/quote]
That would truly be a tragedy. Just imagine a society in which those not willing to murder can be armed. The horror.
[quote]NickViar wrote:
[quote]zecarlo wrote:
[quote]NickViar wrote:
Your whole post is an admission that government is unable to keep guns out of the hands of those willing to break the law.
[/quote]
You think that was clever but not everyone is willing to break the law. This wouldn’t be against the law so even those who were not willing to break the law would end up armed. [/quote]
That would truly be a tragedy. Just imagine a society in which those not willing to murder can be armed. The horror.[/quote]
Yeah, because adolescents have such great judgement. If you believe every 12 year old should be allowed to carry a gun then either you don’t know many 12 year olds or, you are 12.
[quote]zecarlo wrote:
Yeah, because adolescents have such great judgement. If you believe every 12 year old should be allowed to carry a gun then either you don’t know many 12 year olds or, you are 12. [/quote]
Who is hiring 12 year olds with such poor judgment?
[quote]pushharder wrote:
[u]Everyone should have the right to worship as they please IF they can prove they can worship properly.
Everyone should have the right to freely assemble IF they can prove they can assemble properly.
Everyone should have the right to petition their government IF they can prove they can petition properly.
Everyone should have the right to speak freely IF they can prove they can speak properly.
Everyone should have the right to the free press IF they can prove they can publish properly.
Everyone should have the right to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures IF they can prove they deserve this security.
Everyone should have the right not to be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation if they can prove they are worthy of such rights.
Everyone should have the right to a speedy trial and to confront witnesses against them IF they can prove they deserve it.
Everyone should have the right to bail or fines that are not excessive nor cruel and inhuman punishment inflicted IF they can prove they deserve such treatment.[/u]
[/quote]
welcome to reality
I guess we have freedom of religion , if you belive in Jesus and not that other guy
I guess you have freedom of speach if you have enough money to broadcast it
I guess you have the freedom to free assembly unless you are black , poor or look like a GANSTA
I guess you have the right not to be tries twice for the same crime unless you have already been found guilty in the media
I guess you have the right to a speedy trial if it is a traffic offense 
eye roll
[quote]pushharder wrote:
[quote]H factor wrote:
…I don’t either, but the idea that EVERYONE should have access to firearms is crazy and I’m a huge 2nd amendment guy… [/quote]
Do you know of ANYONE ANYWHERE that advocates EVERYONE should have access to firearms?
Why do you beat this useless drum?[/quote]
I was merely pointing out that although everyone has the right to a firearm that doesn’t mean society doesn’t need to make distinctions at times. I gave an example of those times. I have no idea what the point of being angry at me is when I’m not arguing something different than you.
I even said I was struggling to come up with ANYTIME where the government should intervene. I was trying to think.
Again, it seems as if you’re trying to attack me over things I haven’t even argued. Which doesn’t make a lot of sense to me, but ok. And also I never said people were saying that I just said it’s obvious in scenarios access needs to be restricted and we need to think about those scenarios and how best to deal with them.
I wasn’t arguing for more regulation in any sense so attacking me for it is just pure strawman. I don’t need you to lay out the fundamentals as much as I need you to read my post and not create things you want me to say.
[quote]NickViar wrote:
[quote]H factor wrote:
I don’t either, but the idea that EVERYONE should have access to firearms is crazy and I’m a huge 2nd amendment guy. My cousin (who could never be taught HOW to use a gun) should not have a gun. [/quote]
-Not everyone will have access to firearms(too poor, parents/guardians won’t allow, etc.), but it is not necessary to legislate who can and can’t have them. Heck, there are even gun dealers who refuse to sell to certain people on occasion.
-x2!
-Who determines this?
-Then why allow the existence of laws(which will only lead to more and stricter laws) that are not necessary(by your own admission, your cousin would not own a gun)?
Question 1. Kryptonite must be regulated by the government, because:
a. long term exposure can cause radiation poisoning in humans.
b. it kills all plant life.
c. it can cause paranoid delusions
d. this is a trick question. Kryptonite is a nonissue-it does not exist; therefore, it does not need to be regulated.[/quote]
I don’t know why people keep coming to the conclusion I was arguing for regulation when I never said I was. I never said it is necessary to legislate who can and cannot have them. At no point. I just said there MAY be special scenarios (that would be highly rare) where we would need to think about how they should best be handled. And I really meant society more than the government.
For instance if my cousin did not have loving parents who had his own safety and self interest at heart then how best to determine these things? Is it something that people selling firearms need to figure out? And if so, how?
…their idea of free asembly
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
I guess you have the freedom to free assembly unless you are black , poor or look like a GANSTA
[/quote]
where can you go in the united states and see LARGE numbers of whites, asians, hispanics walking around downtown all night long and then back to bed when the sun comes up?
nowhere. there may be a few stragglers, but blacks are practicing “free assembly” all night long and i’m sure it’s not just my city.
[quote]H factor wrote:
Is it something that people selling firearms need to figure out? [/quote]
That’s like asking Pepsi to “figure out” why America is so fat…