The Futile Attempt of Gun Bans

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
1

as many know there are many trying to put more regulations and bans on guns, making the gun selling business a very lucrative one. since people think that they are going to ban the gun completely they go out and by guns and ammo.
the right to bear guns is one of the original amendments and no one should have the right to overturn the rights of american that have been in play for over 200 years.
Patrick Henry once said:

“Are we at last brought to such humiliating and debasing degradation that we cannot be trusted with arms for our defense? Where is the difference between having our arms in possession and under our direction, and have them under the management of Congress? If our defense be the real object of having those arms, in whose hands can they be trusted with more propriety, or equal safety to us, as in our own hand?”

if Patrick Henry said that before the amendment was even passed why can we not say it now after it has been in play for over 200 years?

2

You’re not going to find much of an argument in favor of gun control on this board.

Most of us here are all about the right to bear arms, even the extreme liberals like myself.

3

The only more futile endeavor is the war on drugs

4

I agree with you on not overturning the amendmant or constitution but I think we need to re-define the constitution.The right to bear arms doesnt mean the same thing it did in 1776.

“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed”

well we all now what happens when a militia stockpiles weapons and threatens to use them if any opposition is used against them.

I have a CWP and carry guns but I cant brandish it or use it unless my safety or life is threatened.

Now according to the bill of rights it sounds like I should be able to pull it out any time I want but thats not how it works.

So I think we just need to re-define our rights and make them defining of our time.

5

I for one don’t think the Bill of Rights needs to be fucked with by anyone.

6

I honestly think that gun control can work, but it pretty much has to be a hot or cold issue. Either you have to allow people to have guns, or you have to essentially banish all guns making there acquirement difficult or impossible even for criminals.

I think the half-assed efforts at doing away with guns are what cause the problems, you end up disarming only non-criminals while guns are still widely available to criminals.

Things like â??assaultâ?? weapons bans are nothing PR grabs by politicians.

Iâ??ve always maintained a president that doesnâ??t see value in guns for protection needs to start by disarming the secrete service.

On a side note, my state, Tennessee, just made it legal to carry in bars again.

7

Yet, these same conservatives will, with a straight face, talk of the need to ban abortion.

8

And what does banning abortion have to do with gun control? Let’s see, me shooting bad guy and protecting the innocent and ending an innocent life. What’s the problem here?

9

[quote]horsepuss wrote:
I agree with you on not overturning the amendmant or constitution but I think we need to re-define the constitution.The right to bear arms doesnt mean the same thing it did in 1776.

“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed”

well we all now what happens when a militia stockpiles weapons and threatens to use them if any opposition is used against them.

I have a CWP and carry guns but I cant brandish it or use it unless my safety or life is threatened.

Now according to the bill of rights it sounds like I should be able to pull it out any time I want but thats not how it works.

So I think we just need to re-define our rights and make them defining of our time.[/quote]

Snore…

I think you need to read more about the origins of the 2nd Amendment.

10

[quote]horsepuss wrote:

Now according to the bill of rights it sounds like I should be able to pull it out any time I want but thats not how it works.[/quote]

Really? What language of the 2nd Amendment says that you should be able to pull your gun out any time you want? By “pull out” I suppose you mean “brandish”, that is “to shake or wave menacingly”. Bill of Rights or not, if you are brandishing, you’d damn well better have a life or death reason.

11

[quote]horsepuss wrote:
I agree with you on not overturning the amendmant or constitution but I think we need to re-define the constitution.The right to bear arms doesnt mean the same thing it did in 1776.

“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed”

well we all now what happens when a militia stockpiles weapons and threatens to use them if any opposition is used against them.

I have a CWP and carry guns but I cant brandish it or use it unless my safety or life is threatened.

Now according to the bill of rights it sounds like I should be able to pull it out any time I want but thats not how it works.

So I think we just need to re-define our rights and make them defining of our time.[/quote]

The Bill of Rights does not need to be amended to state something that everybody already understands is the case. Nor are constitutions designed to spell out every intricacy and detail. There is a whole host of case law and stautory law associated with every amendment. If the Constitution tried to capture it all, it would be thousands of pages.

14

I think gun control is necessary. Say like a minimum IQ to handle and own firearms. That said, I don’t know much about the process to get a firearms license in the USA.

How does it work?

15

Rest assured, a gun ban and/or the severe restriction of ammunition purchases WILL be attempted. They will use the same old tired B.S. “let’s do it for the safety of our children and society”. I don’t know who’s more dangerous, the grandstanding politicians with an agenda or people who think we should modify the Constitution to “re-define our rights and make them more defining of our time”.

18

[quote]pushharder wrote:
Good point. What other effective way is there to keep the common man, the innocent man, from owning something that he can use for self protection and as a deterrent against tyranny? Gun control rulz! Let’s face it, if we criminalize the possession of guns by criminals we can be assured they won’t have access to them, right? And if we de-arm the general populace then we can be assured that only government officials and the well connected can have them and that would certainly make us safer. It’s a no brainer![/quote]

lol

There are people who lack the ability to exercise the proper discretion necessary with firearms. Surely you aren’t suggesting it’s wrong to make sure every licensed firearm owner can do so? I’m not talking about a blanket ban, just a test or something similarto make sure they are total retards.

Wait, why are YOU so up in arms about this?

Suffrage? Buying food? Mmkay…

[quote]For instance if one of the questions on the National Are You Worthy Test posited the idea that say…gun control by strong centralized powers has always led to greater freedom and quality of life whenever and wherever it has been implemented…and the tested person answered, “Yes” then that would rightfully disqualify that person from ever possessing and using alcohol and Mary Jane or driving a car because c’mon now…anyone stupid enough to answer in the affirmative to that question is definitely too stupid to drive or smoke pot or vote.

An American possesses said “license” by virtue of citizenship and no felony convictions in most jurisdictions.

Concealed carry permits are also now somewhat easily available by non-felons in most states. Incidentally in almost every case where CCW laws have been passed violent crime has noticeably fallen.

It’s really weird that where more folks (including women and the elderly) live in a society where they have an effective and relatively cheap method of self protection that criminals are less inclined to to inflict violence on them, isn’t it? In fact, it’s fuckin uncanny![/quote]

I think you missed the point of what I suggested. You should probably calm down and drink your prune juice.

19

[quote]Makavali wrote:
I think gun control is necessary. Say like a minimum IQ to handle and own firearms. That said, I don’t know much about the process to get a firearms license in the USA.

How does it work?[/quote]

You go buy one.

20

[quote]Makavali wrote:
pushharder wrote:
Good point. What other effective way is there to keep the common man, the innocent man, from owning something that he can use for self protection and as a deterrent against tyranny? Gun control rulz! Let’s face it, if we criminalize the possession of guns by criminals we can be assured they won’t have access to them, right? And if we de-arm the general populace then we can be assured that only government officials and the well connected can have them and that would certainly make us safer. It’s a no brainer!

lol

There are people who lack the ability to exercise the proper discretion necessary with firearms. Surely you aren’t suggesting it’s wrong to make sure every licensed firearm owner can do so? I’m not talking about a blanket ban, just a test or something similarto make sure they are total retards.

Wait, why are YOU so up in arms about this?

Excellent idea! A forced national IQ test should do the trick. We could/should also use that test to determine car ownership, suffrage, a license to have children, ability to buy junk food at the grocery or convenience store, alcohol and marijuana possession, etc.

Suffrage? Buying food? Mmkay…

For instance if one of the questions on the National Are You Worthy Test posited the idea that say…gun control by strong centralized powers has always led to greater freedom and quality of life whenever and wherever it has been implemented…and the tested person answered, “Yes” then that would rightfully disqualify that person from ever possessing and using alcohol and Mary Jane or driving a car because c’mon now…anyone stupid enough to answer in the affirmative to that question is definitely too stupid to drive or smoke pot or vote.

An American possesses said “license” by virtue of citizenship and no felony convictions in most jurisdictions.

Concealed carry permits are also now somewhat easily available by non-felons in most states. Incidentally in almost every case where CCW laws have been passed violent crime has noticeably fallen.

It’s really weird that where more folks (including women and the elderly) live in a society where they have an effective and relatively cheap method of self protection that criminals are less inclined to to inflict violence on them, isn’t it? In fact, it’s fuckin uncanny!

I think you missed the point of what I suggested. You should probably calm down and drink your prune juice.[/quote]

No he’s right. this is a right in our country. how and what do you think about restricting what people call rights based on IQ. I know a lot of idiots that should not smoke dope. Or drink. and why should someone who wants to ban women’s suffrage ( a Jimmy Kimmel sketch, which had women lining up around the block), get the right to vote?

I like guns. Other people like other things. Fat asses eating at fast food are more draining on this country’s resources than me owning a firearm.