100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: Guns | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
My point being that Bear arms doesn't mean own a gun. That was also the supreme courts opinion based on the language used in the 1700s. They even considered putting "for the common defense" after bear arms. I respectfully disagree. 
You can disagree with my opinion. That's all well and good. The last two points are fact though Actually not. The supreme court decides the meaning of the constitution (a fact) and have ruled that it does indeed mean that the citizens have the right to gun ownership (another fact). That doesn't change the fact that the supreme courts opinion was different in United States vs Miller or the fact that the founding fathers considered putting "for the common defense" after bear arms. The supremem court can interpret laws but they cant rewrite history. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
My point being that Bear arms doesn't mean own a gun. That was also the supreme courts opinion based on the language used in the 1700s. They even considered putting "for the common defense" after bear arms. I respectfully disagree.
You can disagree with my opinion. That's all well and good. The last two points are fact though Actually not. The supreme court decides the meaning of the constitution (a fact) and have ruled that it does indeed mean that the citizens have the right to gun ownership (another fact). That doesn't change the fact that the supreme courts opinion was different in United States vs Miller or the fact that the founding fathers considered putting "for the common defense" after bear arms. The supremem court can interpret laws but they cant rewrite history. History has shown, not only in this country but in others around the globe that a disarmed citizenry are defenseless and vulnerable subjects. Every culture taken by communism and socialism has begun with the ruling authority disarming the people. As I said before; "FROM MY COLD DEAD HANDS!" |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
AlphaRebel
on
Thu 10/28/10 08:39 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
ValentinaSS
on
Thu 10/28/10 08:56 PM
|
|
but guns sure make it easier for the dumber weaker ones to do the killing,,, at least the founders had to actually WORK to load and reload between kills, and swords and knives took some type of STRENGtH and EFFORT i agree that i`m weaker than most humans (alot smaller, too), and i must say that i will shoot someone if i know that their intent is to harm me. if all weapons are banned,,,geee, won`t ONLY criminals get a hold of`em? Columbine? other insane spree killings, bombings (Timothy McVeigh),,,,hey,,,cure crazy (along with greed, jealousy, bigotry, & any other murderous motives out there) and i`ll be happy to see it happen. hell, we`ll all feel better |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
My point being that Bear arms doesn't mean own a gun. That was also the supreme courts opinion based on the language used in the 1700s. They even considered putting "for the common defense" after bear arms. I respectfully disagree.
You can disagree with my opinion. That's all well and good. The last two points are fact though Actually not. The supreme court decides the meaning of the constitution (a fact) and have ruled that it does indeed mean that the citizens have the right to gun ownership (another fact). That doesn't change the fact that the supreme courts opinion was different in United States vs Miller or the fact that the founding fathers considered putting "for the common defense" after bear arms. The supremem court can interpret laws but they cant rewrite history. History has shown, not only in this country but in others around the globe that a disarmed citizenry are defenseless and vulnerable subjects. Every culture taken by communism and socialism has begun with the ruling authority disarming the people. As I said before; "FROM MY COLD DEAD HANDS!" That is why we have the 2nd amendment, so we wont be disarmed. You have to right to have a gun for the militia no matter what way you interpret the amendment. That means as long as as you are part of the militia they couldn't disarm you. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
No one will ever get my guns..And If they try they will barrel first.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
No one will ever get my guns..And If they try they will barrel first. Exactly the type of person we don't need owning a gun. I don't agree with the government so I will shoot them. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
No one will ever get my guns..And If they try they will barrel first. Exactly the type of person we don't need owning a gun. I don't agree with the government so I will shoot them. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
there must be a balance of power, to dissuade against corrupt power trying to overtake any opposition of itself, or trying to undermine the democratic system of a republic.
if a governing body has guns, so must the people ruled by a governing body. no different than world powers have equal nuke capability. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
there must be a balance of power, to dissuade against corrupt power trying to overtake any opposition of itself, or trying to undermine the democratic system of a republic. if a governing body has guns, so must the people ruled by a governing body. no different than world powers have equal nuke capability. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Virginia Tech massacre was a school shooting that took place on Monday, April 16, 2007 on the campus of Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University in Blacksburg, Virginia. In two separate attacks, approximately two hours apart, the perpetrator, .... killed 32 people and wounded many others[1] before committing suicide. The massacre is the deadliest peacetime shooting incident by a single gunman in United States history, on or off a school campus. I submit that we all make the voluntary choice to only use these ******** names when its really necessary. We do need to remember and be aware of these tragedies, but we don't need make celebrities out of the sickos. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
but guns sure make it easier for the dumber weaker ones to do the killing,,, at least the founders had to actually WORK to load and reload between kills, and swords and knives took some type of STRENGtH and EFFORT Doesn't make it right to take gun away from law abiding citizens nor the right to protect yourself....or to take away the right to hunt. Just because there are unstable people in the world.....if we take away the right to bear arms then weonly open up the black market more with less of a chance to trace and catalog weapons. everything thats legal isnt 'right' and everything thats illegal isnt 'wrong' 'rights' are a different debate, I am just presenting my reason for personal distaste of guns,,, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In the U.S. during 2004 there were just under 30,ooo people killed by guns with only 40% of them being homocides. The same year, almost 43,000 were killed from cars. Should be get rid of the cars first? cars are vehicles of transportation which can take lives when used carelessly or misused guns are intended to be WEAPONS |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Should aircraft be banned? Think 9-11! 4 'incidents' in a short few hours killed 6000+. Compare that to the number of gun deaths in this country in a whole year. aircrafts are much more difficult to obtain, they are created as a mode of transportation, and it is required to have extensive training before piloting an airplane, not to mention the one who kills with a plane most likely is taking their own life too quite different than guns |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In the U.S. during 2004 there were just under 30,ooo people killed by guns with only 40% of them being homocides. The same year, almost 43,000 were killed from cars. Should be get rid of the cars first? cars are vehicles of transportation which can take lives when used carelessly or misused guns are intended to be WEAPONS What difference does it matter what something was 'intended' for? It's what you do with it that really matters. Silly Putty was originally intended to be used in WW2. What it's actually used for is a far cry from that. Guns aren't always used as weapons. MANY people use them for nothing but shooting at targets (non-living). Others use it for hunting. See how quickly we get over-run by deer, bears, turkeys, rabbits, etc without them! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I'm more scared of all these people who love guns being able to buy them than I am of the army being set loose on the people, or whatever the paranoid delusion is. I'm never quite clear.
However, the wording in the Second Amendment could be read like this: "Because an army is necessary for the security of the state, the private citizens can carry guns." Which probably made a lot of sense at the time. Now, not so much. I'm not sure how much we should be pandering to paranoid delusions. In any case, the idea that you might want to declare war on your own government, and arm yourself for that specific purpose... only in America would you consider that patriotism. Any other country in the world would call that treason. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Should aircraft be banned? Think 9-11! 4 'incidents' in a short few hours killed 6000+. Compare that to the number of gun deaths in this country in a whole year. aircrafts are much more difficult to obtain, they are created as a mode of transportation, and it is required to have extensive training before piloting an airplane, not to mention the one who kills with a plane most likely is taking their own life too quite different than guns Yes, they were created as a mode of transportation, but tell that to the Air Force. Also, do kamikazes in WW2 ring a bell? You consider a 3-5 week ground course, a 100 question multiple guess test, 30-40 hours flight time and an in-flight test extensive? Oh, ya, you only have to be 16 years old. Of course, that's just for a single engine plane (which can still do quite a bit of damage), but is it really all THAT more difficult than getting a drivers license? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In the U.S. during 2004 there were just under 30,ooo people killed by guns with only 40% of them being homocides. The same year, almost 43,000 were killed from cars. Should be get rid of the cars first? cars are vehicles of transportation which can take lives when used carelessly or misused guns are intended to be WEAPONS What difference does it matter what something was 'intended' for? It's what you do with it that really matters. Silly Putty was originally intended to be used in WW2. What it's actually used for is a far cry from that. Guns aren't always used as weapons. MANY people use them for nothing but shooting at targets (non-living). Others use it for hunting. See how quickly we get over-run by deer, bears, turkeys, rabbits, etc without them! it isnt hunters who use guns for the intention of hunting for food that I take issue with,, its paranoid or aggressive individuals with assault type weapons itching for the excuse to use a litte of their brain and even less of their effort to pull a trigger that could END SOMEONES life... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Should aircraft be banned? Think 9-11! 4 'incidents' in a short few hours killed 6000+. Compare that to the number of gun deaths in this country in a whole year. aircrafts are much more difficult to obtain, they are created as a mode of transportation, and it is required to have extensive training before piloting an airplane, not to mention the one who kills with a plane most likely is taking their own life too quite different than guns Yes, they were created as a mode of transportation, but tell that to the Air Force. Also, do kamikazes in WW2 ring a bell? You consider a 3-5 week ground course, a 100 question multiple guess test, 30-40 hours flight time and an in-flight test extensive? Oh, ya, you only have to be 16 years old. Of course, that's just for a single engine plane (which can still do quite a bit of damage), but is it really all THAT more difficult than getting a drivers license? when guns are made to shoot bullets forward and backward(putting the user in as much risk as the one they aim them towards), I can better relate to that analogy SUICIDE missions in cars, planes, or whatever are not so easily considered by most people and there is ALOT more at stake when one comes to that decision than there is by deciding to apply a bit of pressure to a trigger and then go on with your own life after someone else DIES.... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I have no problem with responsible gun ownership. Though, the ones who are kind of scary are the paranoid ones who talk about stockpiling guns and ammo because people and the government are out to get them.
|
|
|
|
|
