yay, 2nd amendment...

ridetoofast · Aug 3, 2005

are you saying this is reason for people not to be able to carry?

Changleen · Aug 3, 2005

So, once he was placed on medication for depresion, no one thought to maybe review his gun licences?

ridetoofast · Aug 3, 2005

but doesnt that beg the question that those miracle cures for depression arent perhaps such a cure at all?

it never ceases to amaze me at the hypocrasy (sp?) of our drug policy here in the states.

we tell children from such a young age...drugs are bad, but wait, these OTHER drugs are ok

kids are just being kids but lets just stifle them with ridlin because parents are too lazy to deal with boys just being boys

and with regard to licenses, look at what that neat fellow named hitler did promplty after occupation to those with registered firearms...he confiscated them

a man with a gun is a citizen

a man without a gun is a subject

and yes this IS a travesty i will NOT argue that

however time and time again very GOOD things come from citizens being armed but the biased media here patently refuses to acknowledge it

when florida passed its concealed carry Hand Gun Inc and its other ilk screamed bloody fvcking murder that the streets would run red with blood

yet crime went DOWN after wards

so don't try to tell me that a sane, LAW abiding person with a gun is a bad thing

you can put any laws you want on the books a criminal, aka OUT law, will always live OUTSIDE of the boundaries of civilized society and circumvent said laws, leaving the LAW abiding citizen hamstrung and defenseless

MR. new zealand yer just a hop skip and jump away from Ozzland, remind me again what happened with home invasions and violent crime down under once law abiding citizens were deprived the right to DEFEND themselves and their property. the same trend occurred in canada too

<rant over>

reflux · Aug 3, 2005

I'm am deeply saddened when I see people fighting tooth-and-nail for their right to own a firearm, but don't think twice when the Patriot Act shats on our civil rights.

Question: Which of the two do you think the founders of our Country would adamantly defend, the right to bear arms, or the Bill of Rights?

ridetoofast · Aug 3, 2005

the ENTIRETY (sp?) of the bill of rights, not just the 2nd amendment. it just happens to be one of the most frequently discussed ones, along with #1 and recently #5

i think the patriot act is dispicable and frightening....EPSECIALLY if that cvnt hillary gets elected

fyi im libertarian by political nature if that helps clarify things at all

thank you for that request though as its quite valid

ohio · Aug 4, 2005

ridetoofast said:
i think the patriot act is dispicable and frightening....EPSECIALLY if that cvnt hillary gets elected

DERAIL: care to be more specific about what Hillary has at all to do with the Patriot Act?

ioscope · Aug 4, 2005

Depression DNE

rooftest · Aug 4, 2005

Although this nut happened to have a license, most crazies who shoot people in traffic don't.

Also, I don't know - but I'd bet Taxachusetts doesn't have a "carry conceal" law (like TX and FL).

rooftest · Aug 4, 2005

dante said:
I'd be shocked if 1% of the illegal guns out there weren't legally purchased from a gun shop at some point...

That's a pretty low bar you set there.

springfield1911 · Aug 4, 2005

Dante, the story is sad, but the title of your post is ludicrous. Since when does the 2nd Amendment have to be responsible for nutjobs and criminal behavior? Hell, every time anyone does anything stupid involving a firearm, it's obviously the fault of the second amendment. People like you make me sick. Rather than deal with the real problems, like how to treat sick people, people like you blame everything on the presence of the Bill of Rights. How nice, it's nice to have a scapegoat ain't it?

Changleen · Aug 4, 2005

springfield1911 said:
Dante, the story is sad, but the title of your post is ludicrous. Since when does the 2nd Amendment have to be responsible for nutjobs and criminal behavior? Hell, every time anyone does anything stupid involving a firearm, it's obviously the fault of the second amendment. People like you make me sick. Rather than deal with the real problems, like how to treat sick people, people like you blame everything on the presence of the Bill of Rights. How nice, it's nice to have a scapegoat ain't it?

Dude, I think the point was that if no-one had guns in the first place random murders would take a drop through the floor.

Changleen · Aug 4, 2005

ridetoofast said:
a man with a gun is a citizen

a man without a gun is a subject

Sorry, That's utter BS.
I hope you don't really believe that.

reflux · Aug 4, 2005

Changleen said:
Dude, I think the point was that if no-one had guns in the first place random murders would take a drop through the floor.

Take that liberal propaganda elsewhere!!!1!!!11

blt2ride · Aug 4, 2005

reflux said:
Take that liberal propaganda elsewhere!!!1!!!11

Unless you're a "well regulated militia" you don't have a right to bear arms, end of story. It always bothers me when people think that the 2nd amendment legally allows everyone the right to bear arms. The 2nd amendment is pretty clear in its explanation: "The right to bear arms, in a well regulated militia."

Additionally, I find it hard to believe that this was his first violent outburst; I'm sure the signs were there.

While I believe people should be able to protect their homes, etc. with firearms, this 60 year old man is NOT a well regualted militia; therefore, his guns should have been taken away.

**For the record, I'm not against firearms in general; I feel that homeowners should have the right to protect themselves and their families. On the other hand, I think that there needs to be stricter laws that restrict these "nut jobs" from getting guns...

OK, I'm sure if we have any NRA members out there you'll love this post, however, if you would have passed your college political science class, you would know what I'm taking about...

Archslater · Aug 4, 2005

blt2ride said:
Unless you're a "well regulated militia" you don't have a right to bear arms, end of story. It always bothers me when people think that the 2nd amendment legally allows everyone the right to bear arms. The 2nd amendment is pretty clear in its explanation: "The right to bear arms, in a well regulated militia."

I'm with you on that... funny how the NRA retoric always leaves out the "well regulated militia" part of the 2nd ammendment.

While I'm not for banning all guns, I fail to seen how people relate having a handgun in their pickup truck to 18th century colonial American militia's.

I also find it interesting that the same party that will defend gun rights to the grave, is the one responsible for eroding our civil liberties in the name of "fighting terrorism".

Ciaran · Aug 4, 2005

Version 1: "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."

Version 2: "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."

There is (in addition to the other numerous debates) a debate over these two versions of the wording. The issue is that the copy of the Bill drawn up on parchment and held in the national archives has slightly different punctuation than the copies sent to the states for ratification. (The Statutes At Large copy does not include the comma). The debate is about the meanings of "militia" and the commas. It's a whole big thing that I only know very little about. Someone else may have more info on this, but my point is that it's not spelled out as clearly as we may think it is.

Do I think I should have the right to own a gun, or sword? Absolutely! Should I be able to own hand grenades or a bazooka or nuclear weapons. No, absolutely not. I think there is a huge difference between weapons designed for protection, hunting, and war. (Obvious I know, but some folks just don't get it). Do I think that someon under heavy medication or who has been diagnosed with clinical depression should have a gun. No.

Personally I don't think regulation is entirely the answer. I think a combination of regulation and education is our best bet.

Just my opinion... your milage may vary.

valve bouncer · Aug 4, 2005

I think it's idiotic to own a gun. A lot of people like them, mostly for strange reasons and most of those reasons are not because they wanna shoot people. I accept that. I don't pretend to understand why they wanna have guns. I just wish they'd let the rest of us people who wanna have a quiet joint in the comfort of our lounge rooms alone. How's this gun people? If you wanna have ya bamm bams, how about you let the reast of us have who wanna have a smoke, let us toke in peace? Whaddya reckon? 'Cos I'm sure you don't wanna start an arguement about which is more dangerous.

blt2ride · Aug 4, 2005

valve bouncer said:
I think it's idiotic to own a gun. A lot of people like them, mostly for strange reasons and most of those reasons are not because they wanna shoot people. I accept that. I don't pretend to understand why they wanna have guns. I just wish they'd let the rest of us people who wanna have a quiet joint in the comfort of our lounge rooms alone. How's this gun people? If you wanna have ya bamm bams, how about you let the reast of us have who wanna have a smoke, let us toke in peace? Whaddya reckon? 'Cos I'm sure you don't wanna start an arguement about which is more dangerous.

Well, I can tell you that this 60 year old man had a gun because he was a COWARD! He was too scared to get out of his car and talk/argue with this person. He waited until this poor man was getting his child out of the car and he opened fire. He waited until this man had no way to defend himself, and put a very small child in harm's way--he is the definition of a coward.

That's the problem with guns, they make cowards act like tough guys. This is the reason I don't think people should have guns in their cars. I guarantee you this 60 year old coward was shooting his mouth off to the 27-year old victim, knowing that he had his gun with him, and could pull it out anytime. Without the gun, he would have played the coward, kept his mouth shut, and kept driving.

Since he was too scared to fight mano y mano, he has ruined a lot of lives. This guy should be taken out back and shot, with his own gun...

reflux · Aug 4, 2005

Ciaran said:
Personally I don't think regulation is entirely the answer. I think a combination of regulation and education is our best bet.

Does anyone have some figures on how much the NRA spends on education each year?

To steal from Chris Rock: "We don't need gun control, we need bullet control. If a bullet costs $5,000, you know there won't be any innocent bystanders. You get shot, people are like 'Man, he musta done somethin!' I can't picture it now, someone sayin 'Man, I'd blow your f'n head off...if I could afford it!'"

Ciaran · Aug 4, 2005

reflux said:
Does anyone have some figures on how much the NRA spends on education each year?

I don't mean "gun education". I meant education in general.

springfield1911 · Aug 4, 2005

blt2ride said:
OK, I'm sure if we have any NRA members out there you'll love this post, however, if you would have passed your college political science class, you would know what I'm taking about...

I'm a third year Applied Mathematics major at UC Berkeley, an NRA member, and passed my Political Science classes with A's...

springfield1911 · Aug 4, 2005

That's the problem with guns, they make cowards act like tough guys. This is the reason I don't think people should have guns in their cars.

It's easy for people living in privilage and security to say that only cowards need guns. But last time I needed one, I was facing a group of 12 mexican hooligans who wanted to take my car, and those beaners only backed off after I got out my rifle.

SkaredShtles · Aug 4, 2005

springfield1911 said:
<snip> beaners only backed off after I got out my rifle.

Don't you know that you hurt your position immensely in many peoples' eyes when you use dumba$$ terms like this? :mad:

Reactor · Aug 4, 2005

I can see a little of both sides of this issue.

First you have to remember when the bill of rights were drawn up, it was soon after the revolutionary war. The country had been occupied by British soldiers, people searched when ever and wherever they felt like it. Troops were quartered in people's homes, and colonials had no rights in the eyes of the British.

After Britian was forced to give up the American colonies, peopel wanted to make sure it didn't happen again. The prevailing attitude was they had won by force of arms. Thomas Jefferson one of the framers of the constitution said :

"But, when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object, evinces a design to reduce [the people] 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."

The second ammendment, I believe, should be interpeted as saying "since the Government needs an army to protect the country, Citizens must be allowed to own guns to counterbalance the possiblility of the army being used against them." It was Jefferson's insurance policy that the American government would always represent the people. It's worked pretty good so far.

Now to the other side of the story:

Guns are easy to use and our society glorifies violence, and T.V. presents the gun as a solution. Have a problem with someone, shoot them, the police have a problem with you, they'll shoot you. So we see on T.V. everynight dozens of people shot to death, it's presented as natural. If you don't have a gun, you're not safe from all those other people with guns that might want to hurt you.

Meanwhile heaven forbid a nipple or breast gets shown, that's sex and it's dirty. As a result Sex which is normal and healthy part of nearly everyone's life, which almost everyone has a desire for is surpressed and bad, Killing someone with a gun, eh.. not so much. At least that's the message we sent people.

It's usually easier to get a handgun than a prescription for an anti-depressant or anti-psychotic medicine or going to court. You have to see a doctor for medicine, you can buy a gun from a private party on the same day. Or fill out some paper work and wait a few days. If you go to court, paper work, lawyers, lots of waiting. The U.S. Supreme Court even went so far as to say you can't sue police for failing to enforce an order of protection. What do most people do... get a gun.

In the modern US, more than half of all murders and suicides are commited with handguns. It's not that guns are in and of them self bad. It's a combination of the ease of getting them, the reduced threshold for using them, and the difficulty of other available options. Depressed... Get a gun and blow your brains out. Have a problem with a neighbor...shoot him like on T.V., Wife getting a divorce and you've got custody issues.... get a gun.

Now the conclussion.

To be fair, 99% the people with guns have a more or less rational thought process and would never use their gun to kill themselves, or hurt someone else. The problem is with, as it so often seems to be, the 1%'ers. Those people who aren't getting help for mental or emotional problems, those people with a bully personality. These problems are amplified by a culture that glorifies violence in televison and games, thereby reducing the threshold at which violence seems like a viable option.

There are something like 300,000,000 guns in America, there is no way this genie is going back in the bottle. I don't think it's rational to even think of taking the guns back. What is rational is working towards a system that makes it harder for people who shouldn't have guns to get them. I don't know what the answer is. Maybe prohibiting private sales and making all gun sales involve a dealer and an intermediary, then beefing up background checks, not to stop the average citizen, but people violent histories, or mental illness that makes them prone to violence.

Do I wish we didn't have so many handguns around, you bet ya, Do I think we can do a better job of controlling who gets them, you bet ya, do I think we can get rid of them, I seriously doubt it. Even if there weren't a consitutional issue, there are 300,000,000 guns available, there is just no way.

Have I P***ed off every one now?

Reactor · Aug 4, 2005

SkaredShtles said:
Don't you know that you hurt your position immensely in many peoples' eyes when you use dumba$$ terms like this?

I'm with you, SkaredShtles.

springfield1911, Racist terms used in a debate just hurt your position, and lowers everyone's opinion of you.

Changleen · Aug 4, 2005

SkaredShtles said:
Don't you know that you hurt your position immensely in many peoples' eyes when you use dumba$$ terms like this?

Not the first time either.

reflux · Aug 4, 2005

Reactor said:
Have I P***ed off every one now?

Actually no. Your post made complete sense.

ohio · Aug 5, 2005

springfield1911 said:
It's easy for people living in privilage and security

Dude, you go to UC berkeley, and you're preaching to others about privilege and security? What are you carrying a gun for... in case some hippy tries to roll you into a joint and smoke you?

Silver · Aug 5, 2005

ohio said:
Dude, you go to UC berkeley, and you're preaching to others about privilege and security? What are you carrying a gun for... in case some hippy tries to roll you into a joint and smoke you?

Hippies or roving bands of niggers intent on raping the white woman...

N8 v2.0 · Aug 5, 2005

Guns are fun!!!

Cooter Brown · Aug 5, 2005

springfield1911 said:
But last time I needed one, I was facing a group of 12 mexican hooligans who wanted to take my car, and those beaners only backed off after I got out my rifle.

Sweet! Personally think you should be legally able to take a couple of them out while you had your gun in hand to send a message to the other thieving bastards

valve bouncer · Aug 5, 2005

I wondered how long it would be until N8 came out with pictures of his courage sticks.

Mackie · Aug 5, 2005

ioscope said:
Depression DNE

Thank you, Tom Cruise. :rolleyes:

clancy98 · Aug 5, 2005

Changleen said:
So, once he was placed on medication for depresion, no one thought to maybe review his gun licences?

Well sadly they dont review that kind of thing. Same case as far as I can tell with criminal drug charges. Can't purchase afterwards, probably in both cases though. (I'm pretty sure they ask you indirectly about your mental health on the HG purchase app)

N8 v2.0 · Aug 5, 2005

valve bouncer said:
I wondered how long it would be until N8 came out with pictures of his courage sticks.

Don't be scared...

yay, 2nd amendment...

Unabomber

scarred, broken and drunk

Paranoid Member

scarred, broken and drunk

Unabomber

Turbo Monkey

scarred, broken and drunk

The Fresno Kid

Turbo Monkey

Monkey

Unabomber

Monkey

Unabomber

Chimp

Paranoid Member

Paranoid Member

Unabomber

Turbo Monkey

Turbo Monkey

Monkey

Fear my banana

Master Dildoist

Turbo Monkey

Turbo Monkey

Fear my banana

Chimp

Chimp

Michael Bolton

Turbo Monkey

Turbo Monkey

Paranoid Member

Turbo Monkey

The Fresno Kid

find me a tampon

Not the sharpest tool in the shed

Turbo Monkey

Master Dildoist

Monkey

Monkey

Not the sharpest tool in the shed