lol,, criminals they have to FOLLOW to get to commit an alleged crime,,yeah,,

they really NEED it for those nights when they just have to stroll around in their car following a lost kid at night AND get out the car and follow a kid around on foot,,,lol

but I know the thought of it gives many people hard ons and pleasure,, ,, to each their own

back to the topic,,,,

Op,Who are the "good people" to be armed and whats your definition of "bad" people? Isnt that a relative term?

Oh so now he was lost?

Why was that wannabe carrying a loaded weapon in a residential neighborhood in the first place?

This is the true crime here... There was no need for a fight to the death and that weapon empowered him enough to follow a young man with invincibility. He deserved to get his azz kicked, but no one deserved to die over this.... ridiculous to me.

As for being a bad Canadian KarmaF... I don't think your opinion labels you a bad Canadian. Running the streets with a loaded 9mm would def make you something else.

I come from the east, where homes look like HOMES, when I moved west , to these 'planned comunities' where ever home looks identical,, took me several months to memorize my way about and identify OUR HOME

so, dark and rainy, yeah,, I can imagine a kid might be lost

especially with the added distrations of nightfall, rain, and a strange man following him in a car

,,,ah,, fell into it,,, its all really irrelevant now isn't it,, hate that I contributed this much to the boners of so many self proclaimed bad *****,,,,,,

once again,, back to the topic,,,,

it will matter when he finally pulls the trigger on some person our culture deems was 'good' and whose life matters,,,,,but until then I think our opinions are lost in the chaos,,,,,and fear, and (dare I say) prejudice

meanwhile, he has gone from merely putting his hands on people, to threatening women with guns ,, some unfortunate victim is in his future when they decide to fight back,,,, unless they are someone society considers a 'thug',,,

on topic, he is CERTAINLY someone who shouldn't be walking around with a gun,,,,

Conrad... For real, serious question here...

Are you a international weapons dealer?

scaredy-Bear??? I've experienced stray bullets wizzing by me in Soho buddy. Nothing you say fazes me, I know it's out of ignorance and old "western" mentality. Come and experience the rush instead of preaching from your swiss alp log cabin LOL

Well,Sunshine,I didn't just heard it Whizz,it actually made two Holes in me,caused a lot of Red Juice to flow out and cost me about five Inches of my Gut,and a Stoma for several years sometime later!
So,I doubt you ever even fired one of those things!

Seems Freud was right about those Fraidy Cats and Scaredy-Bears!

seems Stefan Molyneux was right about you Guys!

If you are for gun control, then you are not against guns, because the guns will be needed to disarm people. So it’s not that you are anti-gun. You’ll need the police’s guns to take away other people’s guns. So you’re very Pro-Gun, you just believe that only the Government (which is, of course, so reliable, honest, moral and virtuous…) should be allowed to have guns. There is no such thing as gun control. There is only centralizing gun ownership in the hands of a small, political elite and their minions.

I disagree with the notion that we need more unarmed victims. Making "good" people helpless doesn't make "bad" people harmless. Innocent people need guns to protect themselves and each other from people with ill intent. I can't help but notice that a lot of Hollywood stars that are anti-gun are escorted by armed guards; talk about hypocrisy. I don't know about you guys, but I think educated responsibility is better than ignorant fear. For untold consecutive years, more U.S. troops have died from suicide than from combat. Should we take away our troops' guns so they would be able to kill themselves? As long as it saves one life, it's worth it right?

I wish all the 2nd amendment and gun ownership advocates would realize that if all the honest law abiding gun owners would surrender their firearms to the authorities then all the criminals would do the same thing.

I meant to say "so they won't be able to" but there seems to be a time limit for editing posts.

FREEDOM IS NOT FREE THE ONLY LAW THAT WILL REDUCE CRIME IS

IF YOU QUALIFY TO BE A PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE YOU MUST BE ARMED

MANDATED MILITIA SERVICE TO PAY FOR AND KEEP YOUR FREEDOMS

PER THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

IN CONGRESS, JULY 4, 1776
The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America

When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men,

deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,

— That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government,

laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. — Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world

-----------------------------

****WHO IS GOING TO HOLD THE GOVT ACOUNTABL AND ENFORCE THE DECALRATION OF INDEPENDANCE

ENTER THE 2ND AMMENDMENT

----------------------------

U.S. Constitution: Second Amendment

Second Amendment - Bearing Arms

Amendment Text | Annotations

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.

----------------------------

DEFINITIONS

-----------------------------

Main Entry: in•fringe
Pronunciation: in-'frinj
Function: verb
Inflected Forms: in•fringed; in•fring•ing
Etymology: Medieval Latin infringere, from Latin, to break, crush, from in- in + frangere to break
transitive verb : to encroach upon in a way that violates law or the rights of another <the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed —U.S. Constitution amendment II>; especially : to violate a holder's rights under (a copyright, patent, trademark, or trade name) intransitive verb : ENCROACH —in•fring•er noun
Merriam-Webster's Dictionary of Law, © 1996 Merriam-Webster, Inc.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

to encroach upon in a way that violates law or the rights of another

en•croach (n-krch)
intr.v. en•croached, en•croach•ing, en•croach•es
1. To take another's possessions or rights gradually or stealthily: encroach on a neighbor's land.
2. To advance beyond proper or former limits: desert encroaching upon grassland.
3. Football To commit encroachment.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

peo•ple (ppl)
n. pl. people
1. Humans considered as a group or in indefinite numbers: People were dancing in the street. I met all sorts of people.
2. A body of persons living in the same country under one national government; a nationality.
3. pl. peo•ples A body of persons sharing a common religion, culture, language, or inherited condition of life.
4. Persons with regard to their residence, class, profession, or group: city people.
5. The mass of ordinary persons; the populace. Used with the: "those who fear and distrust the people, and wish to draw all powers from them into the hands of the higher classes" Thomas Jefferson.
6. The citizens of a political unit, such as a nation or state; the electorate. Used with the.
7. Persons subordinate to or loyal to a ruler, superior, or employer: The queen showed great compassion for her people.
8. Family, relatives, or ancestors.
9. Informal Animals or other beings distinct from humans: Rabbits and squirrels are the furry little people of the woods

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/people

------------------------------------

SO IF THE GOVT INFRINGES (see DEFINITIONS)

THE RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE (SEE DEFINITIONS)

TO BEAR ARMS

WHO IS GOING TOENFORCE THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE
WHEN THE GOVT BEGINS ABUSING THEIR POWERS

------------------------------------


deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed

------------------------------------

AND BEGIN RESTRICTING THE

------------------------------------

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men

-------------------------------------

WHO WILL STEP IN AND REMOVE THE

-------------------------------------

That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government

----------------------------------

AND INSTITUTE THE NEW GOVT

DO YOU THINK THE GOVT IS GOING TO DO IT

IT IS UP TO THE PEOPLE

AND TO DO SO THE PEOPLE NEED TO BE ARMED

AN UNARMED PEOPLE ARE SLAVE TO THOSE IN POWER

AND THE GOVT ARE THE MASTERS

WHICH IS NOT WHAT IS WRITTEN IN

THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDANCE

-------------------------------------

deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,


////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

and you also protect YOUR country and fellow citizens from criminals and terrorists

the military pays for our freedoms in other countries but can not be deployed in country unless there is martial law

i do not want to live under martial law when that happens you are not free

so if you are responsible and cool headed arm yourself and protect YOUR freedom and everyone else's freedoms as well from crimminals terrorist and an overbearing govt if need be

]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]

No person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that office who shall not have attained to the age of thirty five years, and been fourteen Years a resident within the United States

woohooo! the gun hating Canadians are chiming in!

there is already a law stating that mentally deranged people may not own a firearm of any kind they have enough laws now all they have to do is enforce them

can you back up the statement that more troops die from suicide than combat? based upon what do you make that claim?


and the difference here is that military are EXPECTED and PAID for the purpose of going into situations where the objective is kill or be killed,, so yeah, they need to be armed and trained in use of arms

and they need access to psychological counseling as well as a culture that wont stigmatize or remove their ability to provide for their families due to the emotional problems that most often leads to suicide , again, its not about the guns its about the underlying problem

and this is also true with civilians, they are not all stable enough to be armed, and most will never have a need for a gun


so though, I don't advocate taking away the right to have 'arms', I do believe in common sense regulation in terms of qualifying what types of 'arms' and in whose hands they should be


good people need guns about as much as they need to avoid stairs or cars, life is full of potential dangers, and some choices make surroundings more dangerous


the overwhelming majority of people will NEVER be victims to gun crime or need a gun for protection,,, that's just the truth,, whether they are 'good' people or not

so yeah, stable and rational people who wish to have a gun should be able to,, and last I checked THEY CAN

but its not a 'right' that should apply to any type of weapon and every single person in every situation

nor will more guns make us safer, in my opinion, it will just make it harder to determine who the criminals are,,, after all, dead people cant give their version of events,,,,,

I just wish they fought as hard for addressing the issues which feed violence as they do on the obsession with guns and their right to kill others when in fear

if we can continue to decrease the violence and fear, we wouldn't need to obsess so much over the guns,,,,,imho

not far enough, imho

I know from observation and living that plenty of mentally unstable people have never bothered to get help or feel like they need it,,,,so they wouldn't be documented anywhere as being as unstable as they are


perhaps a psych eval, like that given to police, should be required to own a gun and ANYONE caught with a weapon without that permit should face stiff penalties in worst case and have guns ceased in best case

Perhaps if the initial reaction to violence were an initiative to confront the causative issues instead of knee-jerk gun control laws, we could work together to actually diminish the violence...

Some people are obsessed with the right to bear arms, and ...



"What did you say?"


No, no. Not those arms. The right to be in possession of fire arms.



"That's better."


Now where was I? Oh, yeah.

Some people are obsessed with the right of law-abiding people to possess fire arms.

Some people are obsessed with wanting law-abiding people not to possess fire arms.

Now, which obsession is favored by criminals and dictators?

3 issues:

#1 Police aren't any less trigger happy than the general populace. They often "accidentally" kill many civilians

#2 Who would prevent the government from denying stable people weapons? Veterans return home. Many receive counseling for a few months. Veterans are labeled as potential threats by many... Who is going to prevent this demographic from permit denial? Stats show hispanics or blacks are more likely to crimes. Who is to prevent uncle sam from denying them permits based on these statistics?

#3 Who is going to pay for the increase in police force to uphold these regulations? You are now turning average people into criminals and therefore taking effort away from tracking down crime lords and putting it into a search for anyone with a firearm.