Gun Control

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
742

[quote]hungry4more wrote:

[quote]Alpha F wrote:

[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:

Only one question: do states have some ability to restrict the right of gun ownership in the name of public safety? Yes or no?
[/quote]

No.

If there is no caveat in the Constitution, AND common sense does not count ( your opinion ), then it is unconstitutional for the state to restrict gun ownership.

Felons and mentally incompetent have a right to own a gun.

Their right to use can be limited but their right to own cannot as it has been proved by reality; both historically and in practice, felons and the mentally incompetent have and currently do own guns.

[/quote]
Just to be clear…in YOUR ideal government, do people in jail have a right to own guns?[/quote]

Oh, I am completely against the current prison system.
One of government’s mammoth’s failure to an end that is Good - specially an end that is good for the felon.
The punishment seldom fits the crime.

But TB has said it matters not what I think because the state has the power to override the individual’s own moral code.

And, no I am not an idealist. I do not believe government is a good thing.
In a psychologically underdeveloped society, centralized government needs to be put in its place - not elevated to a higher place.

I intensionally boxed felons because TB was using the argument that if the state can exert power on a sector of society ( most of whom have chosen to opt out of society’s code of honorable conduct - and government criminals foremost ) then that means it has power over the whole of society in the name of Good ( public safety ).

Yes, he did not say it was absolute power but the principle behind his argument implies absolute power.

Domination and control as a means to an end that is Good = public safety.

743

[quote]pushharder wrote:

Lemme put it this a different way, TB. I would rather the mentally ill be allowed to keep and bear arms then for the “militia” (all able bodied men) to have their right infringed.

I think this way from a constitutional perspective not necessarily a personal one.[/quote]

That isn’t a “constitutional” perspective - that is a policy preference. You offer a cost-benefit reason to make sure the “militia” doesn’t have their right infringed, i.e., the benefit to the “militia” and their rights is greater than whatever risks alowing the mentally ill to have guns poses, so we go in favor of the higher benefits.

So, back to the beginning - does the Second Amendment prohibit states from having and enforcing these kinds of laws re: the mentally ill?

744

[quote]pushharder wrote:

Thank you for making a point I’ve been making all along.[/quote]

You haven’t really been making this point. You’ve been inventing history that never happened, and then claiming history is on your side of the debate.

745

[quote]undoredo wrote:

[quote]SteelyD wrote:

[quote]Cortes wrote:

Just what is it you think Thomas Jefferson was talking about when he drafted the 2nd Amendment? Paintball? [/quote]

“If he fhall fhould confider affault on my perfon or effential libertief, he fhall acquire a cap in hif aff”
[/quote]
Outstanding! I hope my guffawing just now did not wake any of my neighbors.
[/quote]

Have not read past this, but my wife just came in the room to ask what was I laughing so hysterically at.

746

[quote]atypical1 wrote:

[quote]UtahLama wrote:
A great post from Uncle Sam’s Misguided Children -

The world’s largest army…America’s hunters!

A blogger added up the deer license sales in just a handful of states and arrived at a striking conclusion:

There were over 600,000 hunters this season in the state of Wisconsin. Allow me to restate that number:

Over the last several months Wisconsin’s hunters became the eighth largest army in the world.

More men under arms than in Iran. More than France and Germany combined.

These men deployed to the woods of a single American state, Wisconsin, to hunt with firearms, and no one was killed.

That number pales in comparison to the 750,000 who hunted the woods of Pennsylvania and Michigan’s 700,000 hunters, all of whom have now returned home safely.

Toss in a quarter million hunters in West Virginia and it literally
establishes the fact that the hunters of those four states alone would comprise the largest army in the world. And then add in the total number of hunters in the other 46 states. It’s millions more.

The point?

America will forever be safe from foreign invasion with that kind of
home-grown firepower.

Hunting…

it’s not just a way to fill the freezer. It’s a matter of national
security.

That’s why all enemies, foreign and domestic, want to see us disarmed.

[/quote]

This has always been a poor argument to me. First off I do own guns including a very nice Japanese WWII rifle with bayonet and I think other people should be allowed to own guns.

That being said, if you think the random hunter is going to be able to defend the nation against an armed aggressor or be able to resist government troops then you’re overestimating the average joe. In order to defend something you have to be pretty well organized and well armed. That doesn’t mean a Remington 870.

Nobody else in the world can project power like we can which is why we have never been invaded. Not because of some dude in high viz with a 30.06.

james
[/quote]

Again, it’s not from a foreign enemy to me so much…it’s how folks would protect themselves in the ABSENCE of government…i.e. mass hysteria.

But to play devils advocate, I think you would be surprised how people would act defending their loved ones and property from danger. People would fight to the death, and those are the scariest people of all.

747

I know my question was lost in the fray, so I’ll ask again.

Thunderbolt, are you in the militia?

As a matter of fact, who else in this thread is in the militia?

Any militia members other than me?

748

[quote]JayPierce wrote:

I know my question was lost in the fray, so I’ll ask again.

Thunderbolt, are you in the militia?

As a matter of fact, who else in this thread is in the militia?

Any militia members other than me?[/quote]

What kind are you in? Federal or state (i.e., National Guard or say, the New York Guard)?

Or the private kind, i.e., the militia movement guys?

I am not in any kind of organized militia.

749

[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:

What kind are you in? Federal or state (i.e., National Guard or say, the New York Guard)?

Or the private kind, i.e., the militia movement guys?

I am not in any kind of organized militia.[/quote]
This statement is completely ignorant for someone who is so self-aggrandized as being so self-educated on the Constitution and U.S. Law.

Are you in the militia or not? Or do you even know?

750

[quote]JayPierce wrote:

This statement is completely ignorant for someone who is so self-aggrandized as being so self-educated on the Constitution and U.S. Law.[/quote]

What would being in a militia have to do with my education on the Constitution and U.S. law? Or anyone else’s?

I replied, dumbass, that I am not part of any organized militia.

And I asked you - what kind of militia are you in? One of the federal or state militia? Or one the private “militia movement” militia?

751

You don’t have a clue as to what I’m asking, do you?

You are either in the militia, or not.

Are you, or are you not?

752

Sure is taking you a long time to post a yes or no answer. Would you like me to spoon-feed you the location of the information you need to accurately and concisely answer the question?

753

BTW, some of the liberals are finally waking up and seeing the reality of what this gun control push is:

I couldn’t have been more overjoyed to read this article from a hard-left outlet. We are all Americans, and we all have to stand together in defiance of the one thing that could possibly allow tyranny to gain a solid foothold in this country. There are some VERY solid arguments in that article. Definitely worth a read.

754

Since we don’t have PM’s; out of respect, tb, I feel the need to inform you that I need to head off to bed because I get up at 4am.

So if you post again tonight, I’ll have to get to it tomorrow.

Night, y’all.

755

Roll Tide…!

Mufasa

756

[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:

I replied, dumbass, that I am not part of any organized militia. [/quote]

It was a yes or no question.

You are ducking with a qualifier.

Are you part of the militia, yes or no?

757

I’m going to admit COMPLETE ignorance here.

Can you guys just get to your point?

(Roll Tide…!)

Mufasa

758

[quote]JayPierce wrote:

[/quote]

I am sorry but I have to ask: is this straight history or is it gay history?

759

[quote]JayPierce wrote:
Sure is taking you a long time to post a yes or no answer. Would you like me to spoon-feed you the location of the information you need to accurately and concisely answer the question?[/quote]

I find myself confused.
I see the law–10 USC 311.2.b–but I do not remember that I was ever in a militia–no oath or uniform or instruction or time commitment. (Unless you count my time as a “yellow beret”–in the event of hostilities, I was to be taken hostage.)

I have tried to find more about the section of the law, and I skimmed through Titles 10 and 32 and the Militia Acts of 1792, and I can find nothing else that pertains to the “non-organized” militia as described in 311.2.b.

Could you point out to me the authorizing legislation (In Titles 10 or 32 or elsewhere), organization, command structure, etc., by which I was an unconscious member of a militia for 28 years?

760

[quote]DrSkeptix wrote:

[quote]JayPierce wrote:
Sure is taking you a long time to post a yes or no answer. Would you like me to spoon-feed you the location of the information you need to accurately and concisely answer the question?[/quote]

I find myself confused.
I see the law–10 USC 311.2.b–but I do not remember that I was ever in a militia–no oath or uniform or instruction or time commitment. (Unless you count my time as a “yellow beret”–in the event of hostilities, I was to be taken hostage.)

I have tried to find more about the section of the law, and I skimmed through Titles 10 and 32 and the Militia Acts of 1792, and I can find nothing else that pertains to the “non-organized” militia as described in 311.2.b.

Could you point out to me the authorizing legislation (In Titles 10 or 32 or elsewhere), organization, command structure, etc., by which I was an unconscious member of a militia for 28 years?[/quote]

I have always accepted and known this to be true. Why else did I register with Selected Services when I turned 18? Because I was a United States Citizen, male, and of legal age. Therefore I was obligated to register myself in a data base as a member of a non active, unorganized militia available to be called up in time of war or conflict.