How do you feel about the 2nd?????

[necritan]

How do you feel about the 2nd Amendment?????

Do you think its out-dated???? Doesn't apply to our modern way of life???

Is it limited to "special" people with badges or Celebrity's and Senators with death threats???

What are good limitations or precautions in regard to citizen gun ownership???

Background checks???? Waiting/Cooling off periods????

Assault Weapons.....are they necessary for the average Joe????

What does "keep" and "bear" arms really mean????

And most important......What are your interpretation of the words...."SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED"????????

 

[steeliniraq]

Well if Obama gets elected Im sure you wont have to worry about that because he will dictate what the 2nd means. It always amazes me to see the ones that scream for everyones rights are the first to step all over them!

 

[Inferno]

He said tonight that he would protect the 2nd amendment while getting AK47's out of the hands of gang members.

 

[steeliniraq]

He said tonight that he would protect the 2nd amendment while getting AK47's out of the hands of gang members.

LOL yea so did Clinton. We cant keep people from coming crossing the board in the masses yet we are going to keep illegal AK47s out of the hands of the criminal. How is he going to do this again? When he fails to do this, and he will fail at this task, can I come back and laugh at you because you actually think he has a chance at doing that? Also go back and look at Obama's record when it comes to gun control. Talk is cheap but records are fact.

 

[Inferno]

LOL yea so did Clinton. We cant keep people from coming crossing the board in the masses yet we are going to keep illegal AK47s out of the hands of the criminal. How is he going to do this again? When he fails to do this, and he will fail at this task, can I come back and laugh at you because you actually think he has a chance at doing that? Also go back and look at Obama's record when it comes to gun control. Talk is cheap but records are fact.

If it were me i would collect them all and melt them down to make toasters. He is talking about a control on weapons of violence in the streets of Chicago, Detroit, New York and LA. He is not talking about a hunters rights. There must be a common spot on the ground where both sides can be happy. I never saw anyone hunt deer with an AK47.

You must admit that the gun violence in this country is extreme. There needs to be a way to stem that tide. It needs to be changed.

 

[Gem]

How many AK-47's and the like that are used to commit crimes are purchased legally?

My father-in-law is a Southerner. And the first time we went down to visit him he discovered that I had never fired a gun before, I was 26. Horrified, he took me into his office to show me his "arsenal." He had more guns than I had ever seen before in my entire life. Why a man needs so many guns is beyond me, and truthfully, I find the whole fascination with guns a bit perverse...

HOWEVER...

His guns were purchased legally. They are all registered. He keeps them unloaded and locked. His key is kept far from the closet. His young daughter, my sister-in-law, has been taught since she could understand that going anywhere near that closet will get her a paddling faster than she could blink. She has handled and fired a gun with adult supervision and understands the need for safety completely and utterly.

His guns are not being used to commit crimes - so what do you care if he has an odd hobby. I have a good friend from college who collects ceramic pigs - I find that a bit disturbing and perverse too...but at least my father-in-law can take his toys to a shooting range for some fun...those pigs just sit there and stare...creepy.

I guess what I'm saying is...Is taking the guys away from the people who are purchasing and using them legally really going to stop them from being purchased and used illegally?

I may not understand the hobby...but it seems to me that these gun bans are "feel good" legislation, with little practical use.

As a disclaimer, I do think there must be a point where we say "enough's enough." The Constitution does not grant us a right to own our own person nukes. Perhaps it is with assault weapons, but I would rather debate where the line should be and why...rather than listen to empty promises about how taking guns away from people enjoying them legally is going the stop people from using them illegally.

 

[steeliniraq]

If it were me i would collect them all and melt them down to make toasters. He is talking about a control on weapons of violence in the streets of Chicago, Detroit, New York and LA. He is not talking about a hunters rights. There must be a common spot on the ground where both sides can be happy. I never saw anyone hunt deer with an AK47.

You must admit that the gun violence in this country is extreme. There needs to be a way to stem that tide. It needs to be changed.

Yes i will admit that gun violence is extreme. I also think people need to look a little deeper into how most of the guns used in violent actions are aquired. FYI i used to be in favor of a ban on assault weapons. That was until I saw police outgunned time after time by criminals who aquire these same weapons illegally from south of the boarder. Besides this is a right our country has instilled. One of the main reasons was for protection. Not just protection from bad people but also protection from our own government. You have your understanding of how things should be and I have mine. It is interesting that you name those cities though. I bet if you go ask the police in those cities i wouldnt be one bit surprised if they said the assault weapons you talk about aren't the major problem. Hand guns kill more people then any other weapon and good luck getting rid of hand guns.

 

[steeliniraq]

How many AK-47's and the like that are used to commit crimes are purchased legally?

My father-in-law is a Southerner. And the first time we went down to visit him he discovered that I had never fired a gun before, I was 26. Horrified, he took me into his office to show me his "arsenal." He had more guns than I had ever seen before in my entire life. Why a man needs so many guns is beyond me, and truthfully, I find the whole fascination with guns a bit perverse...

HOWEVER...

His guns were purchased legally. They are all registered. He keeps them unloaded and locked. His key is kept far from the closet. His young daughter, my sister-in-law, has been taught since she could understand that going anywhere near that closet will get her a paddling faster than she could blink. She has handled and fired a gun with adult supervision and understands the need for safety completely and utterly.

His guns are not being used to commit crimes - so what do you care if he has an odd hobby. I have a good friend from college who collects ceramic pigs - I find that a bit disturbing and perverse too...but at least my father-in-law can take his toys to a shooting range for some fun...those pigs just sit there and stare...creepy.

I guess what I'm saying is...Is taking the guys away from the people who are purchasing and using them legally really going to stop them from being purchased and used illegally?

I may not understand the hobby...but it seems to me that these gun bans are "feel good" legislation, with little practical use.

As a disclaimer, I do think there must be a point where we say "enough's enough." The Constitution does not grant us a right to own our own person nukes. Perhaps it is with assault weapons, but I would rather debate where the line should be and why...rather than listen to empty promises about how taking guns away from people enjoying them legally is going the stop people from using them illegally.

Couldn't have said it better!

 

[Inferno]

Yes i will admit that gun violence is extreme. I also think people need to look a little deeper into how most of the guns used in violent actions are aquired. FYI i used to be in favor of a ban on assault weapons. That was until I saw police outgunned time after time by criminals who aquire these same weapons illegally from south of the boarder. Besides this is a right our country has instilled. One of the main reasons was for protection. Not just protection from bad people but also protection from our own government. You have your understanding of how things should be and I have mine. It is interesting that you name those cities though. I bet if you go ask the police in those cities i wouldnt be one bit surprised if they said the assault weapons you talk about aren't the major problem. Hand guns kill more people then any other weapon and good luck getting rid of hand guns.

I think banning some guns in certain areas to make them easier to collect as they have done in Chicago can help. The piece that is always missing is that gangs that form replace broken family units. They form in areas where there is no local business. They form in areas where there is a hoplessness. The fewer guns the better. The more children grow up in hope and see a point in working the better still. When fathers leave homes and children rule the roost there is not always guidance. That is where we drop the ball.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

If it were me i would collect them all and melt them down to make toasters. He is talking about a control on weapons of violence in the streets of Chicago, Detroit, New York and LA. He is not talking about a hunters rights. There must be a common spot on the ground where both sides can be happy. I never saw anyone hunt deer with an AK47.

You must admit that the gun violence in this country is extreme. There needs to be a way to stem that tide. It needs to be changed.

The 2nd Amendment is NOT about hunting. The 39 court decision by the SUpreme Court was clear. To be protected by the 2nd Amendment a weapon must be, in fact, usable and of use to the MILITARY. That clearly includes semi automatic rifles and the supposed "assault" rifles.

AK-47 are not the preferred weapon of gang bangers or criminals, they prefer small easily concealed weapons like uzis and mac 10's, pistols and the like.

It is NOT acceptable to violate my rights because you think it is for the common good. You don't like the 2nd Amendment? Get it changed by an Amendment as is required by our Constitution. Get the people to agree with you. Until you do no one has the right to ban weapons that clearly fall in the scope and intent of the 2nd Amendment.

 

[necritan]

I think banning some guns in certain areas to make them easier to collect as they have done in Chicago can help. The piece that is always missing is that gangs that form replace broken family units. They form in areas where there is no local business. They form in areas where there is a hoplessness. The fewer guns the better. The more children grow up in hope and see a point in working the better still. When fathers leave homes and children rule the roost there is not always guidance. That is where we drop the ball.

Ban the guns....and the criminals will obey. Hmmmmm......How did the Gun ban go that stood in DC for 30 years???? Did it help??? Or did it only unarm the law-abiding???

Are we all aware that there are background checks for gun purchases in this country??? What else is needed???

 

[RetiredGySgt]

I think banning some guns in certain areas to make them easier to collect as they have done in Chicago can help. The piece that is always missing is that gangs that form replace broken family units. They form in areas where there is no local business. They form in areas where there is a hoplessness. The fewer guns the better. The more children grow up in hope and see a point in working the better still. When fathers leave homes and children rule the roost there is not always guidance. That is where we drop the ball.

Banning guns does not work, never has never will. Those criminals do NOT go buy guns legally. They get them illegally, since they are not in fact allowed to have them anyway. Enforce the laws we have, we do not need more laws or bans. All bans do is disarm LAW abiding citizens while criminals have easy access to any weapon they want. It further encourages criminals to commit crimes because they know the citizenry does not have a means to protect themselves.

 

[necritan]

If it were me i would collect them all and melt them down to make toasters. He is talking about a control on weapons of violence in the streets of Chicago, Detroit, New York and LA. He is not talking about a hunters rights. There must be a common spot on the ground where both sides can be happy. I never saw anyone hunt deer with an AK47.

You must admit that the gun violence in this country is extreme. There needs to be a way to stem that tide. It needs to be changed.

Are you suggesting that the 2A ....RKBA is in reference to "hunters" only???

FWIW.....people dont generally hunt with AK's.....I agree.The 7.62 x 39 mm round is a little much to control under full auto fire while trying to get a good shot on bambi. Once again.....is the "Right" to keep and bear arms only in referance to hunting????

Do Militias do Hunting????

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.

 

[necritan]

"Arms in the hands of citizens [may] be used at individual discretion.....in private self-defense." ---John Adams, Second President of the United States.

" No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." --Thomas Jefferson

"Firearms stand next in importance to the Constitution itself. They are the American people's liberty teeth and keystone under independence." ---George Washington



"Laws that forbid the carrying of arms . . . disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes . . . Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man."
--Thomas Jefferson, quoting Cesare Beccaria in On Crimes and Punishment (1764).

 

[necritan]

As a disclaimer, I do think there must be a point where we say "enough's enough." The Constitution does not grant us a right to own our own person nukes. Perhaps it is with assault weapons, but I would rather debate where the line should be and why...rather than listen to empty promises about how taking guns away from people enjoying them legally is going the stop people from using them illegally.

FWIW.....we had an AWB....and it expired without anyone even noticing.....why??? Cuzz it didnt do a damn thing in the first place. I do not wish to own a nuke......a few AR-15's.....yes.

 

[Ninja]

He said tonight that he would protect the 2nd amendment while getting AK47's out of the hands of gang members.

Biden said the same thing when the AWB was signed in 1994.

The people who actually buy that tripe - who I'm lucky enough not to know in real life - are fucking retarded and gun ignorant.

You get some fat soccer mom or some 30 year old wuss posting on his blog from mommy's basement, and they think Obama's talking about some fully-automatic rifle.

Wrong. He's talking about rifles no more powerful than grampa's Ruger Mini-30 (same caliber too). Difference is, the AK-47 has evil, lethality-enhancing features suck as a "conspicuously-protruding" plastic pistol grip, a bayonet lug, and maybe even a collpasible buttstock

Fact is criminals for the most part aren't using these weapons. In 2004 there were something like 75 murders nationwide committed with rifles. So the idea that so-called "assault weapons" are killing thousands upon thousands of inner-city youth every year is just a lie designed to lure in the stupid.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Biden said the same thing when the AWB was signed in 1994.

The people who actually buy that tripe - who I'm lucky enough not to know in real life - are fucking retarded and gun ignorant.

You get some fat soccer mom or some 30 year old wuss posting on his blog from mommy's basement, and they think Obama's talking about some fully-automatic rifle.

Wrong. He's talking about rifles no more powerful than grampa's Ruger Mini-30 (same caliber too). Difference is, the AK-47 has evil, lethality-enhancing features suck as a "conspicuously-protruding" plastic pistol grip, a bayonet lug, and maybe even a collpasible buttstock

Fact is criminals for the most part aren't using these weapons. In 2004 there were something like 75 murders nationwide committed with rifles. So the idea that so-called "assault weapons" are killing thousands upon thousands of inner-city youth every year is just a lie designed to lure in the stupid.

It is called Fear Mongering, something the left is great at.

 

[editec]

I think it was written to address the needs of this nation when it was another time and another place.

Apparently the United States agrees with me since the private ownership of all types of arms is already outlawed.

Now unless any of you are going to make the case that we have the right to own bombs, fully automatic weapons, LAWS rockets and so forth, you agree not only with me, but you and I BOTH AGREE with the premise that the 2nd Amendment is not a suicide pact.

 

[Ninja]

The Second Amendment, like every other Amendment, is not absolute. I've never met anyone who thinks it is.

The right it protects is subject to reasonable restrictions.

There's nothing unreasonable about restricting access to things like nuclear weapons, bazookas, LAWS rockets, etc.

I guess we agree.

 

[Diuretic]

Neat

There ya go!