Guys, please educate me on this 2nd Amendment Issue, I'm trying to understand

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

The Founding Fathers when creating a new government did not envision people defending themselves against the government they were creating.

That is a complete and utter falsehood.

"When the people fear the government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty."
—Thomas Jefferson

"Experience hath shewn, that even under the best forms of government those entrusted with power have, in time, and by slow operations, perverted it into tyranny."
—Thomas Jefferson

"Government is not reason, it is not eloquence, it is force; like fire, a troublesome servant and a fearful master. Never for a moment should it be left to irresponsible action."
—George Washington

"Overgrown military establishments are under any form of government inauspicious to liberty, and are to be regarded as particularly hostile to liberty."
—George Washington

"The means of defense against a foreign danger historically have become the instruments of tyranny at home."
—James Madison

"If tyranny and oppression come to this land, it will be under the guise of fighting a foreign enemy."
—James Madison

"I believe there are more instances of the abridgement of freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments by those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations. ... The means of defense against foreign danger historically have become the instruments of tyranny at home..If tyranny and oppression come to this land, it will be under the guise of fighting a foreign enemy."
--President James Madison

"When once a republic is corrupted, there is no possibility of remedying any of the growing evils but by removing the corruption and restoring its lost principles; every other correction is either useless or a new evil."
— Thomas Jefferson

"Rebellion to tyrants is obedience to God"
—Benjamin Franklin

"It is the duty of the patriot to protect its country from its government."
—Thomas Paine


Our founders UNEQUIVOCALLY AND ALMOST UNANIMOUSLY believed in keeping the power to overthrow our government for fear of replacing one form of tyranny (British Crown) with another.

We have a 2nd Amendment PRIMARILY to prevent tyranny in our own government.

WE CANNOT PREVENT OUTRIGHT TYRANNY WITHOUT EQUAL ARMS.

 

[Darkwind]

As someone who has never grown up with weapons, outside of video games; I need to understand the issue some have with the Second Amendment and automatics.

I appreciate your Constitution, and really I envy it in fact being from Canada as I think it's an amazing document, but far more important, a cherished document defended by so many. So, even those who I may disagree with in general on certain issues, I certainly respect your position on this.

Now I'd like to be educated by those who know alot more than I do about this issue as all I hear in Canada is "gun control gun control. gun control". Many left wing Americans going to CBC and other Canadian networks and promoting this idea, basically criminalizing anyone who supports the Second Amendment in some cases, and I instinctively know there are two sides to this issue.

Is there any practical reason for someone to have a full automatic, and/or these modifiers other than mass murder?

If these weapons are being legally sold, and from I understand the modifiers are a work around to the law; unless there is a good argument why they should be allowed, there has to be a way to stop legal store owners from selling this modifier.

Thoughts on this? Should it be banned? Should ownership of fully automatics come with legal consequences or is there a logical argument for ownership of this weapon?

Thanks in advance.

Probably the worst sticking point here (among a few) is that it's pretty easy to understand that the Founding Fathers didn't/couldn't foresee the massive improvements in weaponry.

If the "arms" covered by the 2nd were muskets, we probably wouldn't be having this conversation.

But the REAL problem is that, now that the issue is politicized, it's necessarily dumbed down to bumper-sticker sloganeering and intellectual dishonesty.

Because that's how we roll.
.

Well, the problem with your argument is that the Founding Fathers envisioned the population having the same weapons as the government. Soldiers in any army in the world at that time used muskets, just like the ordinary citizen. Of course, the ordinary citizen didn't' own canon, but then cannon doesn't really come under the 2nd Amendment.

As weapon technology improved, so did the weapons that the citizens owned.

The truth of this entire debate is that there are those who have a knee-jerk fear response to a horrific shooting like this. But when taken as a whole, there are over 100 million guns in this country and out of all those guns, there are less than 15,000 misuses of these guns. The fear isn't justified.

 

[miketx]

Is there any practical reason for someone to have a full automatic, and/or these modifiers other than mass murder?

The main reason for the 2nd is to be able to defend ourselves from the government. GB tried to confiscate everyones weapons before our Revolution.


If these weapons are being legally sold, and from I understand the modifiers are a work around to the law; unless there is a good argument why they should be allowed, there has to be a way to stop legal store owners from selling this modifier.

We didn't stop the sale of booze, drugs, prostitution....

What utter nonsense.

The Founding Fathers when creating a new government did not envision people defending themselves against the government they were creating.

The 2nd amendment was written so states could form militias to defend themselves against Indians and foreign invasions. It was written before the U.S. had a standing army. The 2nd amendment is now obsolete and is being misinterpreted by a bunch of guntards.

Now THIS ^ is total bullshit! That's why it says the right of the PEOPLE to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. It don't say militia it says the PEOPLE.

 

[MordechaiGoodbud]

Is there any practical reason for someone to have a full automatic, and/or these modifiers other than mass murder?

The main reason for the 2nd is to be able to defend ourselves from the government. GB tried to confiscate everyones weapons before our Revolution.


If these weapons are being legally sold, and from I understand the modifiers are a work around to the law; unless there is a good argument why they should be allowed, there has to be a way to stop legal store owners from selling this modifier.

We didn't stop the sale of booze, drugs, prostitution....

What utter nonsense.

The Founding Fathers when creating a new government did not envision people defending themselves against the government they were creating.

The 2nd amendment was written so states could form militias to defend themselves against Indians and foreign invasions. It was written before the U.S. had a standing army. The 2nd amendment is now obsolete and is being misinterpreted by a bunch of guntards.

Second Amendment to the United States Constitution - Wikipedia

um, maybe not exactly as you'd hope it would be.

when people disagree, this "you're full of shit, i'm right" is why we can't have nice things anymore.

Maybe you might want to point out in that Wikipedia article where I am supposedly "not as you'd hope it would be."

 

[Likkmee]

Is there any practical reason for someone to have a full automatic, and/or these modifiers other than mass murder?

The main reason for the 2nd is to be able to defend ourselves from the government. GB tried to confiscate everyones weapons before our Revolution.


If these weapons are being legally sold, and from I understand the modifiers are a work around to the law; unless there is a good argument why they should be allowed, there has to be a way to stop legal store owners from selling this modifier.

We didn't stop the sale of booze, drugs, prostitution....

What utter nonsense.

The Founding Fathers when creating a new government did not envision people defending themselves against the government they were creating.

The 2nd amendment was written so states could form militias to defend themselves against Indians and foreign invasions. It was written before the U.S. had a standing army. The 2nd amendment is now obsolete and is being misinterpreted by a bunch of guntards.

UM Why did they flee England and why was there a revolutionary war ? They knew damn well they'd be infiltrated and you have been ! The bankers own your asses and your govt ! The vast majority of you idiots don't even own your own homes !

 

[rightwinger]

<wink> <wink>

This is not legally considered an automatic weapon.....but it can fire at 600 rounds per minute

Show us where they sell a 600 round magazine for such a weapon.

Who said anything about a 600 round magazine?

Do you understand what "rate of fire" means?

 

[miketx]

<wink> <wink>

This is not legally considered an automatic weapon.....but it can fire at 600 rounds per minute

Show us where they sell a 600 round magazine for such a weapon.

Who said anything about a 600 round magazine?

Do you understand what "rate of fire" means?

But you didn't say that. You said..."but it can fire 600 rounds per minute....", that's what you said. You didn't say rate of fire. So stop your double talking nonsense and tell us all where you can get a 600 round mag so it can shoot 600 rounds per minute like you said it could?

 

[MordechaiGoodbud]

The Founding Fathers when creating a new government did not envision people defending themselves against the government they were creating.

That is a complete and utter falsehood.

"When the people fear the government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty."
—Thomas Jefferson

"Experience hath shewn, that even under the best forms of government those entrusted with power have, in time, and by slow operations, perverted it into tyranny."
—Thomas Jefferson

"Government is not reason, it is not eloquence, it is force; like fire, a troublesome servant and a fearful master. Never for a moment should it be left to irresponsible action."
—George Washington

"Overgrown military establishments are under any form of government inauspicious to liberty, and are to be regarded as particularly hostile to liberty."
—George Washington

"The means of defense against a foreign danger historically have become the instruments of tyranny at home."
—James Madison

"If tyranny and oppression come to this land, it will be under the guise of fighting a foreign enemy."
—James Madison

"I believe there are more instances of the abridgement of freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments by those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations. ... The means of defense against foreign danger historically have become the instruments of tyranny at home..If tyranny and oppression come to this land, it will be under the guise of fighting a foreign enemy."
--President James Madison

"When once a republic is corrupted, there is no possibility of remedying any of the growing evils but by removing the corruption and restoring its lost principles; every other correction is either useless or a new evil."
— Thomas Jefferson

"Rebellion to tyrants is obedience to God"
—Benjamin Franklin

"It is the duty of the patriot to protect its country from its government."
—Thomas Paine


Our founders UNEQUIVOCALLY AND ALMOST UNANIMOUSLY believed in keeping the power to overthrow our government for fear of replacing one form of tyranny (British Crown) with another.

We have a 2nd Amendment PRIMARILY to prevent tyranny in our own government.

WE CANNOT PREVENT OUTRIGHT TYRANNY WITHOUT EQUAL ARMS.

Not a single 1 of those out of context quotes supports the notion that the founding fathers envisioned the people overthrowing the government they were creating. All those quotes were made when they were taking part in a rebellion against Great Britain.. In fact the constitution explicitly gives Congress the power to put down insurrections. Bet you didn't know that.

 

[rightwinger]

Is there any practical reason for someone to have a full automatic, and/or these modifiers other than mass murder?

The main reason for the 2nd is to be able to defend ourselves from the government. GB tried to confiscate everyones weapons before our Revolution.


If these weapons are being legally sold, and from I understand the modifiers are a work around to the law; unless there is a good argument why they should be allowed, there has to be a way to stop legal store owners from selling this modifier.

We didn't stop the sale of booze, drugs, prostitution....

What utter nonsense.

The Founding Fathers when creating a new government did not envision people defending themselves against the government they were creating.

The 2nd amendment was written so states could form militias to defend themselves against Indians and foreign invasions. It was written before the U.S. had a standing army. The 2nd amendment is now obsolete and is being misinterpreted by a bunch of guntards.

Second Amendment to the United States Constitution - Wikipedia

um, maybe not exactly as you'd hope it would be.

when people disagree, this "you're full of shit, i'm right" is why we can't have nice things anymore.

Modern scholars Thomas B. McAffee and Michael J. Quinlan have stated that James Madison "did not invent the right to keep and bear arms when he drafted the Second Amendment; the right was pre-existing at both common law and in the early state constitutions."[72] In contrast, historian Jack Rakove suggests that Madison's intention in framing the Second Amendment was to provide assurances to moderate Anti-Federalists that the militias would not be disarmed

 

[rightwinger]

<wink> <wink>

This is not legally considered an automatic weapon.....but it can fire at 600 rounds per minute

Show us where they sell a 600 round magazine for such a weapon.

Who said anything about a 600 round magazine?

Do you understand what "rate of fire" means?

But you didn't say that. You said..."but it can fire 600 rounds per minute....", that's what you said. You didn't say rate of fire. So stop your double talking nonsense and tell us all where you can get a 600 round mag so it can shoot 600 rounds per minute like you said it could?

Do you understand what rate of fire means?
I can drive at 60 mph without actually driving 60 miles

 

[iceberg]

Is there any practical reason for someone to have a full automatic, and/or these modifiers other than mass murder?

The main reason for the 2nd is to be able to defend ourselves from the government. GB tried to confiscate everyones weapons before our Revolution.


If these weapons are being legally sold, and from I understand the modifiers are a work around to the law; unless there is a good argument why they should be allowed, there has to be a way to stop legal store owners from selling this modifier.

We didn't stop the sale of booze, drugs, prostitution....

What utter nonsense.

The Founding Fathers when creating a new government did not envision people defending themselves against the government they were creating.

The 2nd amendment was written so states could form militias to defend themselves against Indians and foreign invasions. It was written before the U.S. had a standing army. The 2nd amendment is now obsolete and is being misinterpreted by a bunch of guntards.

Second Amendment to the United States Constitution - Wikipedia

um, maybe not exactly as you'd hope it would be.

when people disagree, this "you're full of shit, i'm right" is why we can't have nice things anymore.

Maybe you might want to point out in that Wikipedia article where I am supposedly "not as you'd hope it would be."

not going to have a debate or much less a discussion with someone who's "guntard'ing" around.

your mind is made up. what's the point?

 

[skookerasbil]

Is there any practical reason for someone to have a full automatic, and/or these modifiers other than mass murder?

The main reason for the 2nd is to be able to defend ourselves from the government. GB tried to confiscate everyones weapons before our Revolution.


If these weapons are being legally sold, and from I understand the modifiers are a work around to the law; unless there is a good argument why they should be allowed, there has to be a way to stop legal store owners from selling this modifier.

We didn't stop the sale of booze, drugs, prostitution....

What utter nonsense.

The Founding Fathers when creating a new government did not envision people defending themselves against the government they were creating.

The 2nd amendment was written so states could form militias to defend themselves against Indians and foreign invasions. It was written before the U.S. had a standing army. The 2nd amendment is now obsolete and is being misinterpreted by a bunch of guntards.

Holy crap........9 years on this message board. Ive seen some stooped posts before but this one clearly gets the nod for STOOPIDEST EVER post!!


Take a bow s0n...........that takes some doing!!


Are there some "Founding Fathers" we don't know about yet?

 

[skookerasbil]

full autos work good for suppression fire

Winner, winner. Chicken dinner.

From the 32nd floor in Vegas, that shooter could have killed much more efficiently employing one shot, one kill. He instead wanted to terrify more than kill or he just didn't understand or care about the best way to use the weapons he had.

They call the M249 S.A.W. (Below) a "support" weapon. Its purpose is to provide cover for riflemen to advance on a position, or to defend a position from one side.

Our Government is in control of the most powerful military ever to have existed. We have a responsibility to keep that government in check. Our government military has automatic weapons. We don't. That is a severe disadvantage. Our government has the power to lay down suppressive fire, where we don't. That should not be.

If you think about it, the only people keeping the US military and check are its citizens.

One universal truth that all must except is that people in power want more power, and will do whatever they can to gain it. There is never enough power for people who lust for power. No one, I repeat none of our political leaders are immune from this power lust. They must be kept in control.

We the people of the United States of America are the last line of defense keeping our power-hungry political leaders from taking unilateral control of our Government and using the most powerful military the world has ever known, to attack Canada, Mexico, or any other place to satisfy that power lust.

So, in essence, automatic weapons in the hands of Americans saves Canada. Canada should advocate for Americans having full auto weapons.

An outstanding point.

Highly trained military using an automatic weapon are going to get only a 50% strike rate. Many more rounds this guy shot missed than hit given that weapon and at that distance. It is not a 1,000 yard weapon.

He had 112 minutes.

Using an expensive sniper weapon, the amount of dead would actually be higher.....far higher. Every hit would be a kill shot.

This is another example of progressives doing everything in their lives via emotion.

 

[Crixus]

<wink> <wink>

This is not legally considered an automatic weapon.....but it can fire at 600 rounds per minute

If that bothers you then you need to take it up with the BATF as they have written very detailed letters explaining why these devices like slide fire and such are legal. Many of those letters were written by the BATT under the dominion of half black jesus. Where was your outrage then? Or 30 years before?

 

[miketx]

<wink> <wink>

This is not legally considered an automatic weapon.....but it can fire at 600 rounds per minute

Show us where they sell a 600 round magazine for such a weapon.

Who said anything about a 600 round magazine?

Do you understand what "rate of fire" means?

But you didn't say that. You said..."but it can fire 600 rounds per minute....", that's what you said. You didn't say rate of fire. So stop your double talking nonsense and tell us all where you can get a 600 round mag so it can shoot 600 rounds per minute like you said it could?

Do you understand what rate of fire means?
I can drive at 60 mph without actually driving 60 miles

Yes, but we can all see that is not what you said. Proving that you will lie about anything.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

But you didn't say that. You said..."but it can fire 600 rounds per minute....", that's what you said. You didn't say rate of fire.

Do us a favor. Leave the gun talk and gun decisions to us. Thanks.

 

[RDD_1210]

<wink> <wink>

This is not legally considered an automatic weapon.....but it can fire at 600 rounds per minute

Show us where they sell a 600 round magazine for such a weapon.

Who said anything about a 600 round magazine?

Do you understand what "rate of fire" means?

But you didn't say that. You said..."but it can fire 600 rounds per minute....", that's what you said. You didn't say rate of fire. So stop your double talking nonsense and tell us all where you can get a 600 round mag so it can shoot 600 rounds per minute like you said it could?

Do you understand what rate of fire means?
I can drive at 60 mph without actually driving 60 miles

He's literally too dumb to grasp this.

 

[miketx]

But you didn't say that. You said..."but it can fire 600 rounds per minute....", that's what you said. You didn't say rate of fire.

Do us a favor. Leave the gun talk and gun decisions to us. Thanks.

Why?

 

[miketx]

<wink> <wink>

This is not legally considered an automatic weapon.....but it can fire at 600 rounds per minute

Show us where they sell a 600 round magazine for such a weapon.

Who said anything about a 600 round magazine?

Do you understand what "rate of fire" means?

But you didn't say that. You said..."but it can fire 600 rounds per minute....", that's what you said. You didn't say rate of fire. So stop your double talking nonsense and tell us all where you can get a 600 round mag so it can shoot 600 rounds per minute like you said it could?

Do you understand what rate of fire means?
I can drive at 60 mph without actually driving 60 miles

He's literally too dumb to grasp this.

why do you ignore the fact that he didn't say that?

 

[RDD_1210]

<wink> <wink>

This is not legally considered an automatic weapon.....but it can fire at 600 rounds per minute

Show us where they sell a 600 round magazine for such a weapon.

Who said anything about a 600 round magazine?

Do you understand what "rate of fire" means?

But you didn't say that. You said..."but it can fire 600 rounds per minute....", that's what you said. You didn't say rate of fire. So stop your double talking nonsense and tell us all where you can get a 600 round mag so it can shoot 600 rounds per minute like you said it could?

Do you understand what rate of fire means?
I can drive at 60 mph without actually driving 60 miles

Yes, but we can all see that is not what you said. Proving that you will lie about anything.

See, like I said....literally and actually too dumb to understand what you said.