Are knives arms?

[Vastator]

Wrong. They did not and could not anticipate today's weaponry.

Shocker! This just in… The founding fathers weren’t clairvoyant!

Instead… they authored a constitution founded on something that never changes. Human nature…

 

[Vastator]

.

Shit dude ... You lack the common sense necessary to understand I got extra credit for spelling it correctly ...

.​

I noticed that! Well done. Maybe that makes up for a small portion of the auto-“incorrects” I’ve been subject to…

 

[toobfreak]

Today's weapons are a far cry from the muskets used in Washington's America.

Completely irrelevant. The 2A says nothing about any of that! When it was written, it authorized private militias to be fully equipped with the latest available as any other standing army, jackass. Are you really that stupid to suggest people of that day were not aware that weapons of the future would continually advance?

These people fully intended that citizens be equipted to defend against ALL ENEMIES, foreign OR domestic, otherwise, there was no point of it.

Nobody in their right mind would approve of the weaponry that is available to today's gun owners. Unnecessary, for sure.

**** off, tulip. You have an awful lot to learn about real Americans, not the kind of dog shit you hang out with that can't light a match because your mommy would yell at you.

AK47? C'mon man!!

You are free to choose not to buy one. Don't even think about trying to decide what the other 300 million of us ought to buy or have the right to choose!

I do not care about your mind set. I care that our gun laws are not being enforced and gun ownership not regulated. Guns are readily available to buy and are in the hands of the wrong people, the Menéndez brothers being prime examples. Can you procure them illegally? Sure, but why do that when you can buy all you want legally.

Fearmongering BONEHEADS like you inevitably lead every country to regulation which inevitably leads to confiscation. Lawful private citizens get disarmed while the actual criminals go right on using guns in robberies and murder, in every case actually resulting in THE EXACT OPPOSITE of what little commie gun grabbers like you set out to accomplish, because you always wrongly identify the GUN as the problem, instead of the socioeconomic policies you progs set forth which force people INTO crime.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Today's weapons are a far cry from the muskets used in Washington's America.

And yet...
George Washington would have, unquestionably, fully approved of every potential militiaman, and every frontier family, being in possession of an AR15 and a cartridge box full of loaded 30rd magazines.
Change my mind.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Also, an American expressing his personal, subjective opinion – and as already correctly noted, an opinion that is meaningless, completely devoid of legal, Constitutional merit.

And yet...
George Washington would have, unquestionably, fully approved of every potential militiaman, and every frontier family, being in possession of an AR15 and a cartridge box full of loaded 30-rd magazines.
Tell us why you disagree.

 

[M14 Shooter]

That is an example. Pick any of today's advanced weapons. You know what I mean.

Some have made the argument, bordering on the frivolous, that only those arms in existence in the 18th century are protected by the Second Amendment . We do not interpret constitutional rights that way. Just as the First Amendment protects modern forms of communications, e.g., Reno v. American Civil Liberties Union, 521 U. S. 844, 849 (1997) , and the Fourth Amendment applies to modern forms of search, e.g., Kyllo v. United States, 533 U. S. 27, 35–36 (2001) , the Second Amendment extends, prima facie,to all instruments that constitute bearable arms, even those that were not in existence at the time of the founding.

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA v. HELLER

www.law.cornell.edu

 

[Man of Ethics]

Actually, you are wrong....in Britain, British teenagers are knifing each other to death at alarming rates.......to the point the British government wants to ban knives that have points on them...........

Nevertheless, murder rates in places where guns are banned are generally lower then murder rates in places that have guns.

 

[Man of Ethics]

It happens all the time.

Most murder and suicide attempts with knives fail.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Most murder and suicide attempts with knives fail.

No they dont.

 

[Man of Ethics]

No they dont.

Most suicide attempts without guns fail. Here.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Most suicide attempts without guns fail. Here.

That doesnt say what you think it says. Only 5 percent of all suicide attempts use firearms. So a hell of a lot of people kill themselves with out firearms.

 

[Man of Ethics]

That doesnt say what you think it says. Only 5 percent of all suicide attempts use firearms. So a hell of a lot of people kill themselves with out firearms.

Over half "successful" suicides in USA are by guns.

 

[2aguy]

Nevertheless, murder rates in places where guns are banned are generally lower then murder rates in places that have guns.

And that has no relationship to guns........their criminal cultures are different with less emphasis on murder......because their criminals have all the access to guns they want, they simply choose not to commit murder with them.

 

[2aguy]

Over half "successful" suicides in USA are by guns.

And all of the successful suicides in China, South Korea, and Japan are not by guns.....and they commit suicide at rates higher than our people do...so the facts show that guns are not the issue.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Nevertheless, murder rates in places where guns are banned are generally lower then murder rates in places that have guns.

Really.
Compare and contrast California and New Hampshire.

 

[Man of Ethics]

And all of the successful suicides in China, South Korea, and Japan are not by guns.....and they commit suicide at rates higher than our people do...so the facts show that guns are not the issue.

Sadly they do not view Suicide as a sin.

As a Jew I believe the suffering of those who commit suicide will be millennia long but not eternal.

 

[2aguy]

Sadly they do not view Suicide as a sin.

As a Jew I believe the suffering of those who commit suicide will be millennia long but not eternal.

Since we are made in God's image, I and he has forgiven us for our sins already...and he knows our most intimate thoughts, I think he will forgive them........he knows that which drove them to that desperate act....but only he knows what he will do with them...

 

[Bobob]

Some have made the argument, bordering on the frivolous, that only those arms in existence in the 18th century are protected by the Second Amendment . We do not interpret constitutional rights that way. Just as the First Amendment protects modern forms of communications, e.g., Reno v. American Civil Liberties Union, 521 U. S. 844, 849 (1997) , and the Fourth Amendment applies to modern forms of search, e.g., Kyllo v. United States, 533 U. S. 27, 35–36 (2001) , the Second Amendment extends, prima facie,to all instruments that constitute bearable arms, even those that were not in existence at the time of the founding.

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA v. HELLER

www.law.cornell.edu

You may have 2nd amendment protection, but that does not negate the intention of the founding fathers.

 

[M14 Shooter]

You may have 2nd amendment protection, but that does not negate the intention of the founding fathers.

The intention of the founding fathers was, in part, that the people had access to firearms in a sufficinnt number and of a sufficient type, to create and maintain an effective militia.
Today, that means AR15s, not muskets.

Thus:
George Washington would have, unquestionably, fully approved of every potential militiaman, and every frontier family, being in possession of an AR15 and a cartridge box full of loaded 30-rd magazines.
Tell us why you disagree.

 

[Otis Mayfield]

The intention of the founding fathers was, in part, that the people had access to firearms in a sufficinnt number and of a sufficient type, to create and maintain an effective militia.
Today, that means AR15s, not muskets.

Thus:
George Washington would have, unquestionably, fully approved of every potential militiaman, and every frontier family, being in possession of an AR15 and a cartridge box full of loaded 30-rd magazines.
Tell us why you disagree.

People with AR15s don't stand much of a chance against people with M4s.

Plus, all the other crap the US military has.

Did you know the US military has a machinegun that fires grenades?