Why the 2nd Amendment needs to be reconsidered...

[daveman]

Not that I think it was about anything but Militias, but let's pretend we are in National Rampage Association crazy land...

This is a Revolutionary War Era Musket. It could fire 2-3 rounds a minute in the hands of a trained infantryman. Accurate to only about 100 yards.

This is a AR-15 Bushmaster.

It can fire 45 Rounds per minute, and has a maximum effective range of 450 meters.

Now, before one of you mutants gets on here and tells me, "Well, the First Amendment never considered Television", you are right.

And we don't treat Television like the printed press. There are restrictions on what you can broadcast, when you can broadcast, and who can broadcast. More to the point, the Television industry largely self-regulates. they don't put commercials for Trojan condoms on The Hub kiddie network.

At the time the 2nd was written, slavery was legal and women couldn't vote.

I'll just go ahead and assume you support those as well.

What do they have to do with the 2nd Amendment?

You want part of the contemporary circumstances of the Constitution, you get all of them.

 

[LordBrownTrout]

Frankly, I think the Internet needs a bunch more regulation and oversite.

And you have the temerity to say you don't hate freedom?

You're a lying sack of shit.

He wants govt in every one of his orifices. He can't think for himself so he alludes to a sub-mediocrity entity such as govt to do it.

 

[kwc57]

Not that I think it was about anything but Militias, but let's pretend we are in National Rampage Association crazy land...

This is a Revolutionary War Era Musket. It could fire 2-3 rounds a minute in the hands of a trained infantryman. Accurate to only about 100 yards.

This is a AR-15 Bushmaster.

It can fire 45 Rounds per minute, and has a maximum effective range of 450 meters.

Now, before one of you mutants gets on here and tells me, "Well, the First Amendment never considered Television", you are right.

And we don't treat Television like the printed press. There are restrictions on what you can broadcast, when you can broadcast, and who can broadcast. More to the point, the Television industry largely self-regulates. they don't put commercials for Trojan condoms on The Hub kiddie network.

Please, please......before you post, ask yourself this simple question.

 

[kwc57]

Frankly, I think the Internet needs a bunch more regulation and oversite.

And you have the temerity to say you don't hate freedom?

You're a lying sack of shit.

He wants govt in every one of his orifices. He can't think for himself so he alludes to a sub-mediocrity entity such as govt to do it.

Well gosh yeah......they know what's best for us!

 

[earlycuyler]

Far as I'm concerned your time in the service pushing papers or turning a screwdriver doesn't impress me. I spent years learning how to use weapons. Your problem is you never developed the proper respect for them otherwise you wouldn't be talking all of this crapola about them.

No, your problem is you think a gun is a substitute for your penis, which is sad about your "shortcomings", I guess.

Civilians don't need military grade firepower. They really don't need guns at all.

They might WANT guns, but they don't NEED guns.

Which is fine, if you want a gun, you should be properly vetted, properly trained and properly insured before we let you have one.

But when you start talking shit about overthrowing the government because you don't have enough angry, stupid white guys to win elections anymore, frankly, that just tells me "respect" isn't your virture.

You sure do talk about guys' penises a lot.

Meanwhile, back in reality:

Why do you want this woman disarmed? So she can be victimized?

He does like his wang.

 

[mascale]

Anyone recalls that the perpetrators of 9/11 were atomized, and therefore were suddenly everywhere! They were especially in Iraq and Afghanistan, having fled to Pakistan(?)! Semi-Automatic weapons are in desperate need, at the Oval Office(?). There are probably maps, there.

"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."

"Just who were these Indigenous Peoples, Anway?" no one asks. These were people with childen, and even now the NRA knows exactly what to do about them(?). . .or something(?)!

If a militia was intended, no one notices, then regulation was also intended, no one notices(?). Probably the person with the weapon was intended to have one that worked, for example, Even in the OP, and shortly thereafter in other posts, probably the militia would want regulation of the planes in the skies, so that mass collisions would not happen. The right to possession of an adequate wepon was likely all that was ever intended. Poison blankets, in fact, would later on become a more favored method of choice.

"Crow, James Crow: Shaken, Not Stirred!"
(In fact, "Who was that mascale. . .anyone(?)!" "He's the Lo-o-o-o-ne White Man! Tune In, and See if he's dead yet(?)!")

 

[daveman]

He does like his wang.

So that makes a grand total of one.

 

[JoeB131]

You sure do talk about guys' penises a lot.

Meanwhile, back in reality:

Why do you want this woman disarmed? So she can be victimized?

Actually, since that gun is 43 times more likely to kill one of her kids than it will ever kill a bad guy, I think I'd want to look out for her kid.

 

[JoeB131]

Frankly, I think the Internet needs a bunch more regulation and oversite.

And you have the temerity to say you don't hate freedom?

You're a lying sack of shit.

He wants govt in every one of his orifices. He can't think for himself so he alludes to a sub-mediocrity entity such as govt to do it.

Given the internet is the scene of more crime and illegality than your average street corner, yeay, I think it needs to be policed.

So do those dead hookers from Craig's List, I imagine.

 

[Desperado]

You sure do talk about guys' penises a lot.

Meanwhile, back in reality:

Why do you want this woman disarmed? So she can be victimized?

Actually, since that gun is 43 times more likely to kill one of her kids than it will ever kill a bad guy, I think I'd want to look out for her kid.

I doubt that she would want you to look out for her kids!

 

[Desperado]

And you have the temerity to say you don't hate freedom?

You're a lying sack of shit.

He wants govt in every one of his orifices. He can't think for himself so he alludes to a sub-mediocrity entity such as govt to do it.

Given the internet is the scene of more crime and illegality than your average street corner, yeay, I think it needs to be policed.

So do those dead hookers from Craig's List, I imagine.

Really, if the internet is such a bad place, crime and illegality and all that...
You don't have to be here..... Just like you would not be hanging out on those average street corner you mentioned.

 

[eflatminor]

You sure do talk about guys' penises a lot.

Meanwhile, back in reality:

Why do you want this woman disarmed? So she can be victimized?

Actually, since that gun is 43 times more likely to kill one of her kids than it will ever kill a bad guy, I think I'd want to look out for her kid.

That gun can kill someone? Impressive. I would have thought it would take a person pulling the trigger. Who knew?

On the other hand, if you really want to protect the child, we should ban cars since children aged 0-14 are 12 times more likely to die in a automobile accident than to be killed with a firearm.

Among the 10 Leading Causes of death for kids under 14, the use of firearms ranks dead last, about 1.5%. The kid is FAR more likely die by drowning, burning, suffocating, poisoning, or a car accident than it is by the use of a firearm.

 

[JoeB131]

You sure do talk about guys' penises a lot.

Meanwhile, back in reality:

Why do you want this woman disarmed? So she can be victimized?

Actually, since that gun is 43 times more likely to kill one of her kids than it will ever kill a bad guy, I think I'd want to look out for her kid.

I doubt that she would want you to look out for her kids!

Actually, that chick's just a model, I doubt she cares one way or the other...

But more to the point, a gun in the home is 43 times more likely to kill a household member than a bad guy...

We really do need someone to look out for the kids of stupid people who've bought into the Gun Industry's hype.

The National Rampage Association is an arm of the gun industry. They are not your friend, they don't care about you other than the money in your wallet. GET REAL.

 

[JoeB131]

That gun can kill someone? Impressive. I would have thought it would take a person pulling the trigger. Who knew?

On the other hand, if you really want to protect the child, we should ban cars since children aged 0-14 are 12 times more likely to die in a automobile accident than to be killed with a firearm.

Among the 10 Leading Causes of death for kids under 14, the use of firearms ranks dead last, about 1.5%. The kid is FAR more likely die by drowning, burning, suffocating, poisoning, or a car accident than it is by the use of a firearm.

"Mendacity comes in three forms- Lies, Damned Lies and Statistics"- Benjamin Disreali.

 

[JoeB131]

He wants govt in every one of his orifices. He can't think for himself so he alludes to a sub-mediocrity entity such as govt to do it.

Given the internet is the scene of more crime and illegality than your average street corner, yeay, I think it needs to be policed.

So do those dead hookers from Craig's List, I imagine.

Really, if the internet is such a bad place, crime and illegality and all that...
You don't have to be here..... Just like you would not be hanging out on those average street corner you mentioned.

ACtually, that Average Street corner has a cop on it...

The internet needs cops, too.

 

[catzmeow]

Joe is every rabid conservative's vision of the typical progressive, when really he's got more nuts and fruit than a Christmas cake.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Not sure what that had to do with anything I said, but okay, please go there.

Incidently, the government DID make allowances for airplanes as part of the armed forces. They created the Air Force as a separate branch of the military and combined the Navy and War Departments into a unified "Department of Defense"....

In short they ADAPTED to the technology.

MOre to the point, if you use the logic of the National Rampage Association, private citizens should be able to have armed fighter craft... but I think the FAA would want to have a word with you if you tried that.

And the 2nd amendment adapted to technology as well.
In the late 18th century, out forefathers forsaw the possibility that citizens might have to defend themselves from a government armed with these:

230 years later, citizens need to be armed in the eventuality that they have to defend against a government armed with these:

Sorry Joe. You lose again.

You did much better ranting against Mormons than firearms. Either go back to that or find a new shtick. Maybe Jews?

The Constitution does not nor did it ever advocate for the violent overthrow of the government.

In fact..it does the opposite.

The Founders said that.

 

[Desperado]

Given the internet is the scene of more crime and illegality than your average street corner, yeay, I think it needs to be policed.

So do those dead hookers from Craig's List, I imagine.

Really, if the internet is such a bad place, crime and illegality and all that...
You don't have to be here..... Just like you would not be hanging out on those average street corner you mentioned.

ACtually, that Average Street corner has a cop on it...

The internet needs cops, too.

You are kidding right?
I can't remember the last time I saw a cop on a street corner down here.

 

[Missourian]

Actually, since that gun is 43 times more likely to kill one of her kids than it will ever kill a bad guy, I think I'd want to look out for her kid.

I doubt that she would want you to look out for her kids!

Actually, that chick's just a model, I doubt she cares one way or the other...

But more to the point, a gun in the home is 43 times more likely to kill a household member than a bad guy...

We really do need someone to look out for the kids of stupid people who've bought into the Gun Industry's hype.

The National Rampage Association is an arm of the gun industry. They are not your friend, they don't care about you other than the money in your wallet. GET REAL.

Kellermann's study is bunk.

To suggest that science has proven that defending oneself or one's family with a gun is dangerous, gun prohibitionists often claim: "a gun owner is 43 times more likely to kill a family member than an intruder." This is Kellermann and Reay's flawed risk-benefit ratio for gun ownership, [25] heavily criticized for its deceptive approach and its non-sequitur logic. [10] [26] [27] Clouding the public debate, this fallacy is one of the most misused slogans of the anti-self-defense lobby.

Guns in the Medical Literature -- Benefits

​

 

[JoeB131]

I know you guys keep telling yourself Kellerman is bunk.

But not a one of you has actually debunked it... Not once.