Is the right to bear arms outdated.

[Larry L.]

Just a few points, Jim, and I'll bow out 'cause this could go on endlessly:

I think what the Second Amendment says is this: "As passed by the Congress:

The Founders were well versed in the English language. If they had meant "as passed by congress", they would undoubtedly have said so.

Gun rights advocates conveniently forget the first clause of those statements, and concentrate on the second.

...as did the Supreme Court (finally!), did it not? That would seem to indicate that The Court, and rightly so, considered the second "clause" to be the real 'meat' of that part of the amendment.

Besides, what The Founders were saying there was it's necessary for people to have the right to keep/possess/own arms in order to have a militia. And, again, if The Founders had meant only militia members should have the right to keep and bear arms - they would have said so. Instead what they said was "the people".

If gun enthusiasts are willing to have their guns stored and locked up in a local armory as part of a well-regulated militia, then they should have any firearms they want.

...and if the armory is blown up - or its key gets lost? (Okay, admittedly the latter point was mostly in jest.)

Allowing lunatics like Adam Lanza access to assault weapons is not "well-regulating" a militia. If you think it is, you are sadly mistaken.

"Allowing" him access? Reports are he took the guns...and I believe (I'm not sure of this) one report said he had recently tried to buy a gun locally and was turned down.

...the Second Amendment...does not say anything about allowing the populace to own weapons of a level of lethality that could not have been imagined by the Founders.

LOL! Again, The Founders were well versed in the English language. They used the non specific word "arms" because they had to know weapons would evolve over time and they obviously didn't want "the populace" to be limited to the "arms" of their own (The Founders') time. Had they intended otherwise, they would have woven something like this into the Second Amendment: "If, at some time in the future, arms become too lethal in the eyes of some ("too lethal" slays me! [no pun intended] Again, what are the varying degrees of dead?), then, at that time, congress shall have the authority to determine which arms the people can and cannot keep and bear". But they didn't write in anything like that, did they.


I believe we've pretty much beaten this to death at this point, no? We've both made our points, so, as they say on that network you probably scorn , let's let (the readers) decide.


A sincere Merry Christmas & Happy New Year to you and yours, sir.

Larry

 

[Pat]

Al, read my posts again. You don't need a Bushmaster AR-15 to shoot rattlesnakes etc. My point is a ban on assault weapons- military weapons in the hands of civilians.

Would they be ok if they were only sold in the non-military "Hello-Kitty" design format?

 

[Jim Craik]

Jeff, maybe we should give this some more thought, it seems that when they are not fighting tyranny and spoons, they are killing themselves and each other in large numbers.

Bloody Red States and "The Geography of Gun Violence"
Posted by Charles Mudede on Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 8:48 AM


This is the map (notice the reddest states), and this is the finding on American gun violence...

We did find several factors that are associated with firearm deaths at the state level. On the economic front, gun violence was higher in states with lower average incomes. Similarly, gun violence was less likely in states with more college graduates and stronger knowledge-based economies. Gun violence was also higher in states that tend to vote Republican.
​

The national average for gun deaths per 100,000 people is 10. Deep red Alaska is at the top of this national average (20.9 per 100,000), and deep blue Hawaii is at the bottom (3.1 per 100,000).



It seems that red states also have a much higher death rate in auto accidents, mostly because they do not wear seatbelts! It seems they are also fighting Govenment tyranny by not wearing the mandated seatbelts. It seems that Darwin was right.

Now, if we can just stop the much higher teen pregnancy rate in "family values" red states, America will turn blue even faster!

Yes, to a certain extent this was written in jest, but if personal safety is your real reason for having guns, then get rid of your guns, teach your daughters how babies are made, put on your seatbelts and move to a blue state!

 

[Jeff Young]

Jeff, you don't have a clue about weapons. An M60 is a heavy (23 lbs) 7.62mm, tripod mounted machine gun. People don't drive around with them. The responsibility of making sure the felons, kids, mentally unstable and insane don't get weapon IS the governments. Making sure that weapons don't wander off to Mexico on some moronic sting is also the governments responsibility. Covering it up with Executive privilege is criminal.

Actually, have had a fascination with the military, military history and weapons since I was a kid.

Here you go, do some a'readin' and a'learnin' on the M60 Patton tank, the US's first modern MBT:

M60 Patton - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[John Milmont]

So, Biden is heading a commission to come up with new gun control laws. So where is the mental health commission?

 

[Danimal W]

Using my phone so I hope this works....

Jim,

Out of these two rifles, which one is acceptable and which one do you call an assault rifle?

 

[Danimal W]

So, Biden is heading a commission to come up with new gun control laws. So where is the mental health commission?

And why isn't this "mental health commission" looking at Biden?

Joking aside.... This is why gun owners are sceptical about the government... They say we need to look at both issues but yet only actually focus on the one.

Antigun people repeatedly say, "gun owners should compromise."

Funny, I always thought that compromise meant that BOTH sides give up something... So the antigun side wants gun owners to give up some rights, what are the antigun people giving up? NOTHING.

 

[Jeff Young]

"We" are giving up the lives of loved ones, children and innocents killed by the gun culture created by your hobby.

 

[Jim Craik]

Using my phone so I hope this works....

Jim,

Out of these two rifles, which one is acceptable and which one do you call an assault rifle?

Lets see, both will make innocents dead, neither is acceptable to me!

 

[Jim Craik]

Antigun people repeatedly say, "gun owners should compromise."

Posted be Danimal

Anti gun people are not responsible for thousands of deaths each year.

 

[Danimal W]

Posted be Danimal

Anti gun people are not responsible for thousands of deaths each year.

And law abiding gun owners are not either... Criminals are.

Ok... Answer this question for me.... Cocaine and heroin are both 100% completely banned/illegal, right? And yet there is STILL a cocaine and heroin problem in this country, right???

 

[Danimal W]

Lets see, both will make innocents dead, neither is acceptable to me!

And so does a felon with long rap sheet who was paroled and crushed in the skull of my ex-wifes uncle using a parking curb. Gibbons was unrecognizable after the brutal attack.

 

[Danimal W]

"We" are giving up the lives of loved ones, children and innocents killed by the gun culture created by your hobby.

Sorry, but murder by any means is illegal, and yet it still happens.

And sorry, but my hobby did not turn anyone into a criminal.

 

[Jim Craik]

And so does a felon with long rap sheet who was paroled and crushed in the skull of my ex-wifes uncle using a parking curb. Gibbons was unrecognizable after the brutal attack.

Yes curb deaths and spoon deaths are also unacceptble!

 

[Danimal W]

Yes curb deaths and spoon deaths are also unacceptble!

So what are you going to do about those?

 

[John Milmont]

So what are you going to do about those?

Obviously and Assault Curb and Spoon ban.

The ban will cover spoons that have contoured grips and/or polymer handles or are colored black.
Curbs of only a certain size will be allowed.

 

[Al Wohlstrom]

Al, you got it partially right, it's wacked out people all right, but its wacked out people with guns!

Since we can't just remove all the wacked out people, the only answer it to remove the guns!

The government does make it so wacked out people can't buy guns, there is a process where people go through goverment computers prior to buying a gun. Owners are supposed to lock the trigger mechanism and or lock the gun up. Don't ask me WTF this shooters mother was thinking.

 

[Jim Craik]

Al,

That process obviously does not work, wacked out people continually are able to get guns, there are just too many.

The mother in this most recent mass murder would go to bars and brag about all her guns, she is not alone, theft is a big problem.

As we are totaly unable to keep guns away from wackos and as we can't get rid of wackos, we must get rid of guns!

 

[Tom P]

Actually, have had a fascination with the military, military history and weapons since I was a kid.

Here you go, do some a'readin' and a'learnin' on the M60 Patton tank, the US's first modern MBT:

M60 Patton - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I did know that, but it was far more absurd, than the M60 machine gun.

 

[Danimal W]

And speaking of the process.... For anyone not familiar with the process....

Anyone who purchases a firearm from a dealer INCLUDING DEALERS AT GUNSHOWS, must fill out a form 4473. This is used for the background check. It is a felony to lie on the form. One of the questions asks if the buyer is a felon? Then a purchaser must sign the form stating that all info is correct.

The government has stated in the past, that these background checks have prevented XXX amount of felons from buying guns. Great, but why has almost none of these felons been prosecuted??? They have a signed document as evidence!!!