Bill Sikes Posted January 22, 2013 Share Posted January 22, 2013 YOU may all in favour of regulation but it seems a sizable number of Americans gun owners and the NRA are not. To them any regulation seems to equate with a ban on firearms. Personally I am unsure how one can be happy given the carnage and cost inflicted by the ready availability of firearms in the US - it is a public health epidemic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Hartnell's Mane Posted January 22, 2013 Share Posted January 22, 2013 <p> What's wrong with the Huffington Post? I've seen you use stuff from Breitbart before. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Hartnell's Mane Posted January 22, 2013 Share Posted January 22, 2013 Because the NRA is little more than a mouthpiece for the gun manufacturers who see any regulations as a threat to their profits, most Americans could care less about Smith & Wesson's profits so they wave the second amendment around and make gun control sound like an attack on the constitution. This is what the right to bear arms was referring to Single shot, max four rounds per minute (by a professional soldier under ideal conditions) accurate up to about 50 yards. "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." Funny how the NRA and pro-gun nuts always ignore the first part of the 2nd amendment and jump right to the end. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heretic Posted January 22, 2013 Share Posted January 22, 2013 http://www.youtube.com/watch?&v=AtyKofFih8Y Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghostsof1915 Posted January 22, 2013 Share Posted January 22, 2013 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LkxH8iVrK5o Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shift-4 Posted January 22, 2013 Share Posted January 22, 2013 I'll make this statement assuming that the majority of the NRA and pro-gun nuts understand a: How to read at all, or b: reading and comprehension. "Context" is a dirty word among teabagging gun fanatics. Of course...someone who understands context...and understands the time frame in which that document was written...recognizes that when that clause was put into the Constitution, this extremely young and fledgling country had just gotten out of a long battle for independence from the British. The writers of this document put this clause in to provide that there would be a militia or "citizens' army" strong enough to fend off any other invasions from the Redcoats. In their WILDEST dreams...none of the authors would EVER have envisioned semi or fully automatic weapons nor anything really beyond a musket...let's be honest. The Constitution is firm and strong, but in some places needs to be updated to dispel extremists like the National Redneck Association. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tearloch7 Posted January 22, 2013 Share Posted January 22, 2013 Makes me think that we should return to medical journals of the late 1700s too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heretic Posted January 22, 2013 Share Posted January 22, 2013 Here's part 2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tf-i3Y5iRYo&NR=1 More Americans have died from guns on their own soil since JFK was killed then all the Americans killed in all the wars that Americans have fought in. That's all the wars since there have been Americans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Hartnell's Mane Posted January 22, 2013 Share Posted January 22, 2013 Here's part 2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tf-i3Y5iRYo&NR=1 More Americans have died from guns on their own soil since JFK was killed then all the Americans killed in all the wars that Americans have fought in. That's all the wars since there have been Americans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. White Posted January 22, 2013 Share Posted January 22, 2013 More people die in the US from hands and feet than from guns Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heretic Posted January 22, 2013 Share Posted January 22, 2013 I'll say this tongue-in-cheek...but in some ways I am quite thankful there are idiots out in this country speeding up nature's course as it were. This planet is severely overpopulated, and as there is no LEGAL way to thin out the numbers of the human race, I suggest we take all the warning labels off of everything in this world and let the problem sort itself out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Hartnell's Mane Posted January 22, 2013 Share Posted January 22, 2013 What's so funny (not funny ha ha) is that Alex Jones talks about the issue with mental stability. Well...I'm not a psychiatrist but Alex Jones is about as mentally unstable as there is - so he should not be allowed to own guns. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Electro Rock Posted January 22, 2013 Share Posted January 22, 2013 1968 is incidentally about the time when the street gang and thug demographic started settling their disputes with guns, after a long hiatus from the Prohibition era. For that problem to be allowed for so long is mind boggling. Anyway, take out the gang related deaths, the self defense killings by civilians and police, the suicides, and its a different story. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heretic Posted January 22, 2013 Share Posted January 22, 2013 1968 is incidentally about the time when the street gang and thug demographic started settling their disputes with guns, after a long hiatus from the Prohibition era. For that problem to be allowed for so long is mind boggling. Anyway, take out the gang related deaths, the self defense killings by civilians and police, the suicides, and its a different story. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Hartnell's Mane Posted January 22, 2013 Share Posted January 22, 2013 Anyway, take away all the wars that were fought and it's a different story. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Electro Rock Posted January 22, 2013 Share Posted January 22, 2013 Because the NRA is little more than a mouthpiece for the gun manufacturers who see any regulations as a threat to their profits, most Americans could care less about Smith & Wesson's profits so they wave the second amendment around and make gun control sound like an attack on the constitution. This is what the right to bear arms was referring to Single shot, max four rounds per minute (by a professional soldier under ideal conditions) accurate up to about 50 yards. "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." Funny how the NRA and pro-gun nuts always ignore the first part of the 2nd amendment and jump right to the end. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Hartnell's Mane Posted January 22, 2013 Share Posted January 22, 2013 The civilian firearms manufacturing industry just isn't that big, worth only a few billion a year, it's not a monster like Big Oil or Big Pharma, most of the NRA's budget must come from private donations. Nor is the NRA exactly unopposed, as well as most of the DNC and many Republicans, you have a dizzying array of NGOs and professional shills trotted out by the media to represent the opposing viewpoint. Anyway, the 2nd Amendment didn't specify any technological limits on arms just as the first Amendment didn't specify any technological limits on means of communications. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wetcoaster Posted January 22, 2013 Author Share Posted January 22, 2013 Because the NRA is little more than a mouthpiece for the gun manufacturers who see any regulations as a threat to their profits, most Americans could care less about Smith & Wesson's profits so they wave the second amendment around and make gun control sound like an attack on the constitution. This is what the right to bear arms was referring to Single shot, max four rounds per minute (by a professional soldier under ideal conditions) accurate up to about 50 yards. "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." Funny how the NRA and pro-gun nuts always ignore the first part of the 2nd amendment and jump right to the end. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Electro Rock Posted January 22, 2013 Share Posted January 22, 2013 So...because it didn't specify "limits" it gives these baboons today free reign to just take what the Second Amendment actually says and stretch it to include military grade weaponry? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Hartnell's Mane Posted January 22, 2013 Share Posted January 22, 2013 "Military grade" is inherent, in fact pretty much all the traditional hunting rifles used today were derived from what were at one time state of the art military rifle designs. The weapons used by the early U.S. Militia were in many cases better than what standing national armies of the day were using. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.