ForgotPassword?
Sign Up
Search this Topic:
Forum Jump
Senior Member
Posts: 227
Jul 4 07 10:19 PM
Quote: Hitler (AKA The Missing Link):In short, the gun control crowd is hoplophoic, homophobic, shortsighted, ignorant, and even racist.
Quote: Hitler:"the fundamental principle that a government and its agents are under no general duty to provide public services, such as police protection, to any particular individual citizen." Warren vs. The District of Columbia.
Posts: 1144
Jul 5 07 3:42 AM
Quote:Honestly the gun doesn't change the person to be more homicidal.
Quote:Many anti-gunners feel that people aren't responsible enough to have guns. To some of them I can understand their thinking because maybe they haven't seen responsible people with guns. People like myself. They probably have seen nothing but violence with guns and the symbol of guns to them represents death. which of course is reinforced by the media. Does the media really report people like myself. Nope, we are invisible and do not exist.
Posts: 2468
Jul 5 07 10:21 AM
Quote:There are a lot of blacks on our side than yours. You have a lot of white supremacists on your side. Former KKK Wizard David Duke clearly understands Heston's "cultural war". He praised Heston's speech: "I am thankful to hear a man with such high esteem say essentially the same things for which I have been reviled." "If you register your gun with anybody, you're a nut! When the conspiracy comes for your firearm, give it to 'em like this grand dragon is going to - right between the eyes."-Klu Klux Klan (Richmond Times- Dispatch, July 5, 1967)And who could be more ignorant than the missing link?
Quote:So if you don't have a gun to protect yourself because of gun control laws then it's your fault not the government's.
Quote:The government isn't under any general duty to protect you so they can pass all the gun control laws they want according to your quote.
Quote:No, but when someone is homicidal, and they have a gun, they are more likely to be successful than someone with a knife. It all depends on the situation, in the home with domestic abuse it is a lot easier with a knife, but out on the streets it is much harder.
Quote:Which asks the question of why a person needs a license to drive a car, but not to have a gun. I know the constitutional issues are a little bit difficult on this issue, and that an individual in theory should be able to get a gun without being licenses, but if the license was not prohibitive, ie, a person only had to pass a simple course that taught safty etc, then it should not be a problem.
Posts: 8
Jul 5 07 10:34 AM
Quote:There are a lot of blacks on our side than yours. You have a lot of white supremacists on your side.
Quote:Which asks the question of why a person needs a license to drive a car, but not to have a gun. I know the constitutional issues are a little bit difficult on this issue, and that an individual in theory should be able to get a gun without being licenses, but if the license was not prohibitive, ie, a person only had to pass a simple course that taught safty etc, then it should not be a problem.Or, as i have said before, rejuvenate the unorganised militia, force people to be in it, make the time they have to serve very little, and it to include gun safety, target practice etc.
Jul 5 07 5:33 PM
Quote:It is a lot easier for someone who is homicidal to murder with a gun than a knife. A hell of a lot easier, but then we have to ask ourselves; does that mean we should ban all guns to prevent this, which is where we are going with this issue. Of the anti-gunner's and sympathizers only 1% of that group would want that.
Quote:A good example is the Virginia Tech shooting. The maniac used a .22 and a 9mm rifle.
Quote:This board usually debates that balance point. Of which I am for making illegal fully automatic weapons, weapons like the M249 and B240 machine-guns but not semi-automatic weapons like the AR15 and civilian version of the AK-47 of which both can penetrate type 2 body-armor which is worn by most police.
Quote:I would be supportive of even a national firearms license card, that like a driver's license where you could include licenses for conceal carry, class 3 license, and of course to get the license, you would have to take a firearms safety course for the basic section. For conceal carry of course it requires an extra class, and class 3 etc. etc. This would get rid of the multiple cards and wondering if you were able to carry in this state or that. I have a Florida conceal carry and a Utah one and I have to figure out which state I am legal in or not. It would satisfy your requirements and many pro-gunners requirements.
Quote:Also understand that many pro-gunners have been burned in the past so many are against any form of gun licensing. even a national firearms card or state one. Talk to pro-gunners and find out what their concerns are, and the top one would be gun confisgation. But that is because it has already happened with gun registration and/or licensing. I have even been told that the Illinois FOID card system was designed to restrict blacks from purchasing guns. I'll have to check on it more but from what I have seen, it wouldn't be too outrageous to think Daley wouldn't think that way.
Posts: 1024
Jul 5 07 9:50 PM
Reddbecca:Like you said, you can't license a right.
Reddbecca:Ah hell you ARE the enemy! Do you know how the DC gun ban came about!? You had to register your guns and have a license to own them, and then DC decided to stop the registration of handguns in 1976, so automatic gun ban.
Jul 5 07 10:08 PM
Quote:PISTOLS!
Quote:Oh you did NOT just say what I think it is you said! If you were right here I'd slap you in the back of the head for what you just uttered.What the hell is wrong with you!? You don't just decide that you're willing to negotiate your freedoms with these idiots. That's just offering up a sacrificial lamb to appease the wolves; it doesn't work because they won't stop until they get it all. You don't pick and choose, you keep it all!With the way things are going we've got to hold onto all the firearms freedoms and rights that we have and fight to keep them. We can't afford to draw boundaries and lines of where we'd be willing to compromise, that's for the anti-gunners to do; to retreat and make offers to appease us!What's your reasoning for being OK with machineguns being banned? Do you know how many people have been killed with legal machine guns? ONE! What's the necessity for banning them!?
Quote:Ah hell you ARE the enemy! Do you know how the DC gun ban came about!? You had to register your guns and have a license to own them, and then DC decided to stop the registration of handguns in 1976, so automatic gun ban.
Jul 6 07 1:46 AM
Quote:Like you said, you can't license a right.
Jul 6 07 5:17 AM
Quote:The Supreme Court said there is a right to travel. It is part of the right to liberty that is protected in the 5th Amendment. Yet it is okay to license drivers.
Quote:People also register to vote. So licensing and registration gun owners is okay.
Quote:You're not making sense. People that had legally registered their guns in D.C. before the gun ban were allowed to keep their firearms. So in that case registration led to people being allowed to keep their firearms and being exempt from the ban.
Jul 6 07 5:24 AM
Quote:I have never backed away from my insistence on banning fully-automatic weapons. I don't truly see any reason for the use of fully-automatic weapons for civilian use. Not even for self-defense.
Quote:3) There are marksmanship tournaments that use the semi-automatic feature and for basic marksmanship practice and MOUT (military operations in urban terrain) training semi-automatic fire allows shooter to practice these, unlike bolt action which does not.
Quote:If fully-automatic fire weapons are allowed to civilians, it also means that civilian can have M249's and B240 machineguns. The M249 has a 200 round drum and the B240 uses an open cased ammunition. The B240 is the replacement for the M60 an is a two person manned machinegun.
Quote:Currently right now machineguns are illegal and if that rule was set back we would see a rash of people acquiring "heavy weapons". Would it mean criminals would get them ? Probably. Does it have any use among civilian hands, NO. The only reason I can see it in civilian hands is maybe a gun store renting time on such weapons for people to shoot at a range to give people experience on shooting "heavy weapons" but other than that there is no reason.
Quote:This is where me and pro-gunners differ, and I invite any pro-gunner to give me a reason, any reason for the allowance of machine-guns.
Quote:I think you didn't understand my thread. I never mentioned registration. Your talking about gun registration, what I am talking about is a gun license similar to a driver's license.Currently right now if you have a conceal carry permit you need to understand what states you can carry in and if you travel that is a pain in the butt. In fact we recently had a person arrested at the sears tower who had a CCW license but didn't know about Illinois, where CCW is illegal.My option would allow licensed people to carry concealed in every state and the license card would circumvent local laws like Chicago and DC for those who decide to get CCW on their national firearms card. Similar to background checks those with records would of course be denied, while those with clean records and able to pass the safety program, (which was a concern of OMDP), are able to attain CCW privileges.Now I also said the license could also be expanded for people to have class 3 licenses, but like CCW they would have to go through the necessary training to have such weapons. But that section can be debated, because I have yet to hear a valid reason for anyone to have fully-automatic rifles.
Posts: 335
Jul 9 07 5:50 PM
DefenderofBrady:The Supreme Court already said you don't have that right in the Baldwin decision.
defenderofbrady:And I have rights to life and happiness. So these rights should be protected from people with guns. If I get shot I won't be very happy and I might even die and that would violate my rights.
defenderofbrady:In other countries people don't get shot as much so their rights are more protected. So we need to have more gun control like they do.
Posts: 1330
Jul 9 07 8:10 PM
Moderator
Quote:. As I have said the right to keep and bear arms is just that, a right, a human right.
Jul 10 07 1:34 AM
Quote:A supreme court ruling will never take away my right to keep and bear arms any more than it will take away my right to be Catholic. Our rights are not given to us by the supreme court.
Quote:As I have said the right to keep and bear arms is just that, a right, a human right.
Quote:No different than freedom of religion.
Quote:When you try to tell a person you cannot own a gun, or you cannot be Jewish you are violating their rights.
Quote:When you advocate for things like gun bans you are advocating for the restriction of peoples rights,
Jul 10 07 7:44 AM
Quote:All "rights" have scope, and the 2A especially protects only a small amount of what you do with your gun.
Quote:So in 2000 BC all humans were having their "right" infringed upon because guns did not actually exist!!!
Quote:The reality is, it is a "right" that was founded by humans, the english BoR had something that was developed over the space of 100 years, and lead to a RBA in certain state constitutions, the 2A is the first instance of a RKBA, it is a constitutional "right" rather than a god given, human, fundamental, natural "right".
Quote:Religion has been around a lot longer than firearms.
Quote:More, you are infringing upon this person's "rights", because quite frankly, there are probably 5 million americans who cannot keep or bear arms because the US govt says they cant.
Quote:So what does this say about your govt then? There are gun bans in the US.
Jul 10 07 2:20 PM
Quote:We know why there is a RKBA, we can see through the development of history why it exists, so to suggest that it is something fundamental of humanity itself is more of a joke than anything else.
Jul 10 07 4:15 PM
Quote:How often in this day and age do criminals actually have automatic weapons? Even the ones illegally and extensively converted to machineguns?
Jul 10 07 4:43 PM
Quote:They had them all the time before they were restricted so the fact that they don't have them now shows that restricting them took them out of the hands of the criminals.
Jul 11 07 3:40 AM
Quote:The only place a persons rights have scope is at the point where they infringe upon someone elses. The fact that I own firearms infringes upon nobody elses rights.
Quote:Non sequitur, they did however have the right to invent them. They also had the right to carry rocks, clubs, spears, etc. as long as they didn't use them to infringe on anothers rights.
Quote:I realize you don't believe that people have inheirent rightsand you believe that rights are granted by the gov't, and that's sad, but let me make something clear, my rights as a person are not granted to me by the BOR nor are they granted to me by the SCOTUS. They also cannot be taken away by a missinterpretation of the 2A.
Quote:Catholicism has been around longer than Mormanism does that mean Catholics have a right to freedom of religion and Mormans don't. I don't think you thought that comment through very well.
Quote:Here we have to have a bit of seperation. If the Gov't has taken away someones RKBA because they are a rapist, murderer, mugger, etc. Tough cookies.
Quote:They willingly violated the rights of others, there by forfeiting their own.
Quote:On the other hand if the gov't is violating the RKBA of Joe Public, DC for example, then they are wrong and people shouldn't stand for it. Many don't.
Quote:As I said, it is wrong.
Quote:but I pay little heed to laws that violate my rights.
Quote:If guns were banned where I live it would make exactly zero difference in weather I have them or not.
Quote:No different then if Catholicism were outlawed, I'm not going to change my religion by gov't edict any more then I'll give up my guns by gov't edict.
Jul 11 07 3:51 AM
Quote:Regardless of that fact, it's not for YOU to decide. What the hell do you know about rights in the first place? You said you don't believe in them, and you never had any to begin with.
Quote:That brings me to another subject. Apparently Britain has decided to give medical fish a Bill of Rights. The very notion that they can "give" a list of what rights are to fish shows just how conceded they are.
Quote:Arms you bastard, not guns! A-R-M-S! All arms are not guns, arms applies to more than just handguns and rifles and shotguns and machineguns!
Quote:Again, someone without rights, in a different country, thinking he knows our country better than we do.
Quote:And weapons have been around longer than humans, religion and violence. Sticks and rocks existed before humans appered on Earth.
Quote:What're you trying to get at with this crap again? Criminals don't have rights because they gave them up by deciding to violate the rights of others.
Quote:It says our government has overstepped its boundaries and that it's time for it to be beat back, either bit by bit or all at once.
Jul 11 07 2:16 PM
Quote:The only reason they had them in the first place was because the government enacted Prohibition, creating a market for illegal liqour, which gave the criminals the money they needed in the first place to get those guns that nobody else could afford.
Share This