United States & Gun Control discussion.

[Rampart]

The people now as then are the militia, formalised or not.

I suspect you are up to something rather more than debating the subject matter. Most of what to say seems to ignore the actual realities of many people and the entire spirit/ intent of your constitution.

It is far too late to try and arm yourself once attacked, in your home or as a nation. This you need to assimilate fully.

 

[Chopstick]

To be clear, I wasn't stating my opinion, I was telling you about something that actually happened to me personally. The police response was very quick and they were very professional.

Im not trying to be argumentative. I too was stating my experiences. Im glad you had a good outcome but that is not always the case for everyone in every circumstance.

 

[reed11b]

According to Mother Jones, in their rush to show how evil "Assault Weapons" are, a .22lr Marlin semi-auto rifle is an assault rifle. A-fucking-mazing. Why bother with honesty when you can just change the facts around to fit your agenda.
Reed

 

[Marauder06]

Well, for one do we even have state militias anymore? State militias are not even relevant anymore. They were necessary in the past when we had a weak central government who had little powers to raise an army quickly and efficiently to defend the nation. The federal government also had little power in raising taxes to pay for war so it was necessary that state's had a way to quickly and efficiently organize militias to be able to defend itself, hence the reason people needed to keep and bear arms because what good was man in a militia if he had no weapon. Guns were also more important to people's livelihoods than they are today. It was necessary to hunt for food then. It's not anymore. None of these problems exist today.

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.

Well, for one do we even have state militias anymore? State militias are not even relevant anymore.

The "militia" is usually considered to be every able-bodied male able to bear arms. This is an individual right, not something that ends at the state level. But, the states do have a quasi-militia, it's called the National Guard. But a discussion of the Guard and state-level militias is moot, because again, this is an individual right.

Now, states militias could just provide those weapons if it were needed.

The state having control of all the weapons is exactly what the 2nd Amendment seeks to prevent.

Guns were also more important to people's livelihoods than they are today.

Perhaps, but they're not less important to our freedom today than they were back when the Constitution was written.

It was necessary to hunt for food then.

The Second Amendment is not about hunting.

what good was man in a militia if he had no weapon.

That's exactly right. The ultimate guarantor of freedom in this country has always been, and always will be, a man with a gun. What good is the militia (i.e. every able-bodied man) when it comes to defend his freedom if he is unarmed?

 

[Mac_NZ]

When I was a kid on the farm we had a stray dog get in among the sheep (no, I didn't root them). He chased them around picking off the slower ones, just savaging them and then chasing after the flock. The sheep ran back and forth around the paddock bleating and trying to get away from the dog with the odd one being taken out now and then. We saw it from the house and jumped on the quad to get over there but it takes time to get through gates and such.

Now here's the clincher. We had a sign up on the boundary fences saying "No trespassing, dogs will be shot". He just completely ignored it and went after our sheep. There was even a law about dogs worrying sheep but he ignored that as well. The cheek.

The problem was solved when Grandad shot him. True story by the way, we used to get pig dogs that had run off in the bush coming down and attacking sheep every other year.

WTF has this got to do with the current situation you say. Well right now America reminds me of a flock of sheep running around bleating trying to find a safe corner of the paddock. Someone has ignored the signs and the law so the solution must be bigger signs and more laws, surely those will be obeyed. That or ban all dogs over a certain size, capable of a certain speed and exerting "X" psi with their jaws.

No one wants to admit that its a bad world and sheep get attacked, the only solution that works is to stop being a sheep.

 

[AWP]

PLEASE--no drunk posting in this thread tonight!

Mod elections are next Sep. If you have an issue with a post, report it. Otherwise, let the staff do our jobs.

 

[walra107]

According to Mother Jones, in their rush to show how evil "Assault Weapons" are, a .22lr Marlin semi-auto rifle is an assault rifle. A-fucking-mazing. Why bother with honesty when you can just change the facts around to fit your agenda.
Reed

That's actually a really good point that I think has been overlooked here...the shooter wasn't exactly using an AK 47 drum fed or an M4... So automatically attacking assault weapons seems like an easy target to boost ones own political ideologies. To use a tragedy such as this for political gain is awful. Take care of the roots of the problems not just hanging the scapegoat

 

[reed11b]

That's actually a really good point that I think has been overlooked here...the shooter wasn't exactly using an AK 47 drum fed or an M4... So automatically attacking assault weapons seems like an easy target to boost ones own political ideologies. To use a tragedy such as this for political gain is awful. Take care of the roots of the problems not just hanging the scapegoat

I believe in THIS case the user was using a derivative of the M4. However, MJ did a "study" of past shootings and there are multiple .22lr rifles listed as assault weapons.
Reed

 

[walra107]

Reed, you are right, my hands got typing faster than my brain...again...:wall:

Well, for one do we even have state militias anymore? State militias are not even relevant anymore. They were necessary in the past when we had a weak central government who had little powers to raise an army quickly and efficiently to defend the nation. ...Guns were also more important to people's livelihoods than they are today. It was necessary to hunt for food then. It's not anymore. None of these problems exist today.

Mrob, yea militias don't exist anymore, and they might not be relevant NOW...however the spirit and the idea that the people have the ability to take up arms in the event it is warranted under oppression and tyranny is what the second amendment is all about. As I have stated before I am certainly not a fanatical when it comes to gun laws, and I feel regulation is necessary, but you cannot take away liberties and principles that ths country was founded on. If it were my family being harmed in a manner like this, you better believe my 12 gauge will be up someone's A$$ in a heartbeat.

 

[Seajack]

Just today my high school passed a rule to let the retired State police that work as security guards carry. A lot of my fellow seniors are up in arms about it for some reason, with no real reason other than to bitch about something. I personally know most of the guards and they're great guys that have been waiting for this for a while.

 

[8654Maine]

Never go shopping when hungry.

Pertinence to this: never make an emotional decision when clear, concise rational thought is required.

Mrob is a classic example of a troll. And has no clue about the Constitution or our current body politic, except how things make him FEEL. And fully expected his views to be antagonistic to the majority on this board.

Why is that? Cause we are all just some dumb military drones who have no individual thought or are incapable of self deduction? Just because we wore the uniform does not make us ritualistically stupid. You'd be surprised at how varied we are. Your sarcastic view probably would have been better received if you were not so insulting.

The preamble to the Constitution included the following: "...to secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity..."

Boy, were they prescient. Cause folks just are so willing to redact liberty.

Franklin, another one of the old white guys that our current society seem to love to second guess, stated it perfectly: "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."

Some folks seem content to be subjects rather than citizens.

 

[Gypsy]

Im glad you had a good outcome but that is not always the case for everyone in every circumstance.

When seconds count...the police are just minutes away.

LEOs do a great job but the fact of the matter is they cannot be everywhere at every minute.

 

[Marine0311]

I only rely on myself for my personal protection and security. Which is why I carry.

 

[mrob]

Mrob is a classic example of a troll. And has no clue about the Constitution or our current body politic, except how things make him FEEL. And fully expected his views to be antagonistic to the majority on this board.

Why is that? Cause we are all just some dumb military drones who have no individual thought or are incapable of self deduction? Just because we wore the uniform does not make us ritualistically stupid. You'd be surprised at how varied we are. Your sarcastic view probably would have been better received if you were not so insulting.

I have been on these boards for close to three years, I just don't have a post count to show for it. I have great respect for members of this board and those who serve and I hope to follow in many of your footsteps one day. I have not once been disrespectful to anyone. But just because my views differ from most people on this board I am somehow ignorant? Don't presume to know me and paint me as something I am not. Please PM me if you (or anyone) would like to continue this further.

 

[SkrewzLoose]

I have been on these boards for close to three years, I just don't have a post count to show for it. I have great respect for members of this board and those who serve and I hope to follow in many of your footsteps one day. I have not once been disrespectful to anyone. But just because my views differ from most people on this board I am somehow ignorant? Don't presume to know me and paint me as something I am not. Please PM me if you (or anyone) would like to continue this further.

Post count makes no difference. Content does.
Where did anyone call you ignorant?
And just ask JBS , Scotth and lately parallel about differing opinions. Difference is, their discussions (while heated at times) are backed in research and facts.

ETA: If you can bring some support to back up your posts, they will be received much better. We might still disagree and argue our side, but they won't be so easily picked apart.

 

[Marine0311]

I have been on these boards for close to three years, I just don't have a post count to show for it. I have great respect for members of this board and those who serve and I hope to follow in many of your footsteps one day. I have not once been disrespectful to anyone. But just because my views differ from most people on this board I am somehow ignorant? Don't presume to know me and paint me as something I am not. Please PM me if you (or anyone) would like to continue this further.

The Founding Fathers believed that a well armed people would be a check against a government that would seek to enslave them as my earlier quote stated. I will defend such a right. I have already gotten into real life long winded debates with those acting on emotions rather than logic. We must preserve our 2nd Amendment now more than ever.

It seems your points are either not making sense or you are coming off of as a troll. It appears you are missing what is being said. Debate is one thing, discussion another but you're missing the forest for the trees here.

 

[mrob]

The Founding Fathers believed that a well armed people would be a check against a government that would seek to enslave them as my earlier quote stated. I will defend such a right. I have already gotten into real life long winded debates with those acting on emotions rather than logic. We must preserve our 2nd Amendment now more than ever.

It seems your points are either not making sense or you are coming off of as a troll. It appears you are missing what is being said. Debate is one thing, discussion another but you're missing the forest for the trees here.

I was trying to argue that view is no longer relevant and that the amendment has become a symbol of our freedom more than a protector of it in today's world and newer problems that our Founding Fathers could not foresee have now taken precedent and need to be addressed.

 

[CDG]

But just because my views differ from most people on this board I am somehow ignorant?

No, you're views are ignorant because they are.....ignorant. You exhibit an astounding lack of understanding about our history, the history of the Founding Fathers, the Constitution as a whole, and the 2nd Amendment in particular. Had you done any reading or research on these subjects, you would not be able to rationally hold the views you have. Differing opinions are one thing, opinions based on absolutely nothing substantial are ignorance. Therefore, you are ignorant. If that hurts your feelings, then pick up a book and fix the problem. Here, I'll even get you started.

“A free people ought...to be armed”
― George Washington

“The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.”
― Thomas Jefferson

“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, Complete Jefferson

“Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom of Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops that can be, on any pretence, raised in the United States.”
― Noah Webster

 

[Rampart]

Once the reading indicated by CDG is complete few rational people will argue gun control..... and they should be awed at the powerful foresight displayed.

 

[Marine0311]

I was trying to argue that view is no longer relevant and that the amendment has become a symbol of our freedom more than a protector of it in today's world and newer problems that our Founding Fathers could not foresee have now taken precedent and need to be addressed.

Which view exactly? The U.S Constitution (and in effect the first 10 Amendments known as "The Bill of Rights") are what our Founding Fathers decided after much long and heated debate. They were written to ensure the right and freedoms that the country was founded on preserve and defend the country from many elements sometimes even there own people as evidenced in the rash of emotional based arguments concerning the CT school shootings.

All the rights are relevant to degrees IMO however they must be preserved and defended or else we will lose our rights and freedoms due to laziness.