Second Amendment rights lead to Second Amendment Remedies

[rightwinger]

Our Founding Fathers thought it was important that Americans have the right to bear arms. Since our inception, guns have played an important role of who we are as a country. Guns are part of being an American. Every child grew up playing Cowboys and Indians. With millions of guns out there, there is no turning back. Guns are a part of America.
With our Second Amendment rights come the accessibility of Second Amendment Remedies. Those aspects of our society that some are not happy with can be dealt with by a gun. If you don't like the way someone is using their First Amendment rights to free speech...you have Second Amendment Remedies available to you. If you don't like someones politics....there are always Second Amendment Remedies
This has become part of who we are. Throughout our history, individuals have relied on Second Amendment Remedies to resolve their grievances. Somebody cuts you off in traffic...you have Second Amendment Remedies available to you. Somebody disses your girlfriend? Second Amendment Remedies.
You want to know what we can do about it? Nothing
We have to live with it. It is part of being an American. We have set our path and now must live with the consequences. Some of those consequences of universal gun ownership are good....some are bad. But thats the way it is

 

[Skull Pilot]

And if more people in the crowd were armed the wack job shooter might not have done the damage he did.

I for one refuse to be anyone's target so I carry.

 

[VaYank5150]

And if more people in the crowd were armed the wack job shooter might not have done the damage he did.

I for one refuse to be anyone's target so I carry.

That's JUST what we need, more armed idiots.

 

[Skull Pilot]

And if more people in the crowd were armed the wack job shooter might not have done the damage he did.

I for one refuse to be anyone's target so I carry.

That's JUST what we need, more armed idiots.

Better to be armed than to be a defenseless sheep led to slaughter.

 

[VaYank5150]

And if more people in the crowd were armed the wack job shooter might not have done the damage he did.

I for one refuse to be anyone's target so I carry.

That's JUST what we need, more armed idiots.

Better to be armed than to be a defenseless sheep led to slaughter.

Oh please....now honestly, while I support everyone's right to own a gun or guns, do we REALLY want to return our society to the good old days of the wild, wild west, where every disagreement was settled with a gun fight? REALLY?

 

[Skull Pilot]

That's JUST what we need, more armed idiots.

Better to be armed than to be a defenseless sheep led to slaughter.

Oh please....now honestly, while I support everyone's right to won a gun or guns, do we REALLY want to return our society to the good old days of the wild, wild west, where every disagreement was settled with a gun fight? REALLY?

Since when would taking out a wacko who is shooting innocent children be the same as solving every dispute with a gun?

It's these insane leaps of so called liberal logic that make you guys look like fucking morons.

 

[G.T.]

I support gun rights for every law abiding Citizen, and I don't think that Guns by themselves kill people.

If guns weren't around, he could have driven a stolen Mini-Bus through that crowd and possibly take out 20 or so. There, the common denominator wouldn't obviously be the weapon, but the intent to kill.

If anyone thinks that without guns, someone intent on killing couldn't kill, I think you're probably a little bit naive.

 

[VaYank5150]

Better to be armed than to be a defenseless sheep led to slaughter.

Oh please....now honestly, while I support everyone's right to won a gun or guns, do we REALLY want to return our society to the good old days of the wild, wild west, where every disagreement was settled with a gun fight? REALLY?

Since when would taking out a wacko who is shooting innocent children the same as solving every dispute with a gun?

It's these insane leaps of so called liberal logic that make you guys look like fucking morons.

Let me put it another way. I own a handgun for self protection. After purchasing the gun, I immediately went to the firing range to make sure I knew how to use it. I bought a cleaning kit to make sure it stays in perfect working condition and I regularly retrain with this gun to make sure I know what I am doing and can be proficient with it, should the need arise. I know for a fact that many gun owners do not bother with any of these steps. Do you want any idiot running arouund with a gun, who hasn't been trained on how to use it, or trained in aiming it "coming to the rescue" in a large crowd situation? REALLY? You conservatives try to paint things as being so simple, when in fact they not always are. An armed moron could do just as much damage, if not more trying to "help" with a gun as did Loughner.

 

[rightwinger]

And if more people in the crowd were armed the wack job shooter might not have done the damage he did.

I for one refuse to be anyone's target so I carry.

More Second Amendment remedies

 

[rightwinger]

I support gun rights for every law abiding Citizen, and I don't think that Guns by themselves kill people.

If guns weren't around, he could have driven a stolen Mini-Bus through that crowd and possibly take out 20 or so. There, the common denominator wouldn't obviously be the weapon, but the intent to kill.

If anyone thinks that without guns, someone intent on killing couldn't kill, I think you're probably a little bit naive.

In our society, how many times have we had mass killings by stolen mini-bus?

Americans like their guns and use them to resolve grievances

 

[G.T.]

I support gun rights for every law abiding Citizen, and I don't think that Guns by themselves kill people.

If guns weren't around, he could have driven a stolen Mini-Bus through that crowd and possibly take out 20 or so. There, the common denominator wouldn't obviously be the weapon, but the intent to kill.

If anyone thinks that without guns, someone intent on killing couldn't kill, I think you're probably a little bit naive.

In our society, how many times have we had mass killings by stolen mini-bus?

Americans like their guns and use them to resolve grievances

Why would anyone resort to the elaborate plot of acquiring a mini-bus when guns are available?

My point was, if guns WEREN'T available, you WOULD still see killers.....they'd simply resort to more creative tact at that point and possibly worse. How does that not make sense?

Do you think a killer says in his head, "I'll ACTUALLY kill now, since guns are available!"

No...he probably decides he's a killer first, then he goes about planning his means.

Eliminating guns would simply see him resorting to other means.

 

[Two Thumbs]

Our Founding Fathers thought it was important that Americans have the right to bear arms. Since our inception, guns have played an important role of who we are as a country. Guns are part of being an American. Every child grew up playing Cowboys and Indians. With millions of guns out there, there is no turning back. Guns are a part of America.
With our Second Amendment rights come the accessibility of Second Amendment Remedies. Those aspects of our society that some are not happy with can be dealt with by a gun. If you don't like the way someone is using their First Amendment rights to free speech...you have Second Amendment Remedies available to you. If you don't like someones politics....there are always Second Amendment Remedies
This has become part of who we are. Throughout our history, individuals have relied on Second Amendment Remedies to resolve their grievances. Somebody cuts you off in traffic...you have Second Amendment Remedies available to you. Somebody disses your girlfriend? Second Amendment Remedies.
You want to know what we can do about it? Nothing
We have to live with it. It is part of being an American. We have set our path and now must live with the consequences. Some of those consequences of universal gun ownership are good....some are bad. But thats the way it is

Give me Constitutional rights and freedoms, warts and all.

 

[zzzz]

How about giving everyone tazers? The problem with carrying a gun is when to use it. If there is a gunfight going on are you going to join in because you have a gun? How do tell who is police and not and the police are going to shoot you if your the bad guy or not because your a threat to them. So in reality you options are limited. Now if you are at home and the door busts in ...

I think all the registrations and background checks do work to a certain degree but it is too easy to buy or steal a gun when you want one. And if your going to break the law then you want a stolen one anyway so all of that means nothing to the criminal. Therefore the attempt to narrowly define the 2nd has no bearing on crime, it just hurts the regular American citizen.

All of this kneejerk reaction to events was foreseen by the founding fathers. Our government was put together with it in mind. That is why we have Representatives elected every 2 years to give the government new direction fairly quickly but also we have the steadier long term veiw with the Senates 6 years terms. They are suppose to balance out, and of course the Presidency has 4 years to impliment his vision. And the final authority is the US Supreme Court and its lifetime appointments to give our laws continuity.

 

[Stephanie]

The lefty zombie sheep would FOLLOW their party slave masters off a cliff it they told them to jump.

 

[editec]

Guns aren't the problem

They're the symptom of the problem.

Guns will also not be the solution to the problem.

If guns could have solved the problem of intrusive and ineffective government, they'd have done it already.

Guns do not solve the problem of crime, either. In fact they exascerbate it.

Guns serve a few people's need to feel safer in an increasingly unsafe world, and that's about the best that can said for them.

But if you're one of those people living in one of those places where the nutters and criminals seem to outnumber the sane people, that's probably justification enough to own guns.

If I lived in some of the shitholes where civilized life is impossible, I'd arm myself, too.

But don't EVEN try to tell me that you're having guns is going to solve anything in this society other than your own sense of safety.

 

[Revere]

I support gun rights for every law abiding Citizen, and I don't think that Guns by themselves kill people.

If guns weren't around, he could have driven a stolen Mini-Bus through that crowd and possibly take out 20 or so. There, the common denominator wouldn't obviously be the weapon, but the intent to kill.

If anyone thinks that without guns, someone intent on killing couldn't kill, I think you're probably a little bit naive.

In our society, how many times have we had mass killings by stolen mini-bus?

Americans like their guns and use them to resolve grievances

Why would anyone resort to the elaborate plot of acquiring a mini-bus when guns are available?

My point was, if guns WEREN'T available, you WOULD still see killers.....they'd simply resort to more creative tact at that point and possibly worse. How does that not make sense?

Do you think a killer says in his head, "I'll ACTUALLY kill now, since guns are available!"

No...he probably decides he's a killer first, then he goes about planning his means.

Eliminating guns would simply see him resorting to other means.

Would government make you safe from box cutters, or fertilizer crammed into a rented truck if it took away your guns?

 

[FreedomEagle]

This is america

 

[G.T.]

In our society, how many times have we had mass killings by stolen mini-bus?

Americans like their guns and use them to resolve grievances

Why would anyone resort to the elaborate plot of acquiring a mini-bus when guns are available?

My point was, if guns WEREN'T available, you WOULD still see killers.....they'd simply resort to more creative tact at that point and possibly worse. How does that not make sense?

Do you think a killer says in his head, "I'll ACTUALLY kill now, since guns are available!"

No...he probably decides he's a killer first, then he goes about planning his means.

Eliminating guns would simply see him resorting to other means.

Would government make you safe from box cutters, or fertilizer crammed into a rented truck if it took away your guns?

no, and my post already says it wouldn't but thanks for the follow up question

 

[daveman]

 

[rightwinger]

In our society, how many times have we had mass killings by stolen mini-bus?

Americans like their guns and use them to resolve grievances

Why would anyone resort to the elaborate plot of acquiring a mini-bus when guns are available?

My point was, if guns WEREN'T available, you WOULD still see killers.....they'd simply resort to more creative tact at that point and possibly worse. How does that not make sense?

Do you think a killer says in his head, "I'll ACTUALLY kill now, since guns are available!"

No...he probably decides he's a killer first, then he goes about planning his means.

Eliminating guns would simply see him resorting to other means.

Would government make you safe from box cutters, or fertilizer crammed into a rented truck if it took away your guns?

Americans already have a choice of using boxcutters or rented trucks filled with fertilizer. We are Americans....we like our guns and that is the weapon of choice when we invoke our Second Amendment Remedies.

Those Americans without guns do not tend to go out and get boxcutters or vans full of explosives. They tend to vent their frustrations through First Amendment Remedies