Interesting indeed. (Not actually about guns)

[crimson5pheonix]

A recent ruling by the U.S. Supreme court has limited state's rights to ban firearms by allowing any citizen to own a gun for self defense anywhere in the country.
Source: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/37972148/ns/us_news-crime_and_courts/
Of course this will cause controversy no matter what. But whether this is good or bad, victory or defeat, it makes the next story stand out a bit more.

The next story being of a Houston teen who shot a burglar trying to break and enter his parents house. They tried kicking the front door, and failed. They tried kicking the back door, which also failed. They were successful at breaking a front window though. Of course, as soon as he broke it, he got shot by the teen. He was wounded and got away with his partner.
Source: http://abclocal.go.com/ktrk/story?section=news/local&id=7528124

Of course, this will also cause some ripples in the gun control argument, but that doesn't matter. That's not the point of this. I want to know some interesting juxtapositions. Here we have a ruling on gun control, and immediately after a gun helps some local people. It doesn't have to be as controversial as this, but have you had some interesting juxtaposed coincidences?

 

[Souplex]

Is this law for all guns? Rifles? Concealables? (The ones people actually use to commit crimes) Assault weapons? (The ones you would attempt to raid fort Knox with)
Also: Shouldn't this be in religion and politics?

 

[TimeLord]

Yay for ironic coincidence

 

[crimson5pheonix]

Is this law for all guns? Rifles? Concealables? (The ones people actually use to commit crimes) Assault weapons? (The ones you would attempt to raid fort Knox with)
Also: Shouldn't this be in religion and politics?

Nope. Because you didn't read the whole thing. I just want to know good/funny juxtapositions.

As for your gun question, all it says are "self-defense" guns. So I assume small caliber hand guns.

 

[Sn1P3r M98]

Banning guns isnt going to help. People who really want to commit a crime are gonna get guns from the black market, and then the people who they attack will be defensless.

 

[Meggiepants]

Okay, I want to comment, but I just can't think of anything like this.

Other than the obvious anyway. Gov. Palin makes sure teen abstinence education is used in schools and then teen daughter gets pregnant.

Let me think on it a bit. I'm sure somewhere in my memory is one of these.

 

[Divine Miss Bee]

honestly, i'm sick of people perverting the constitution. the right to bear arms applies exclusively for their use against a corrupt state-guns were to be kept on hand in case the citizenry had to form a militia. now that we have the national guard, which IS our militia, the right for individuals to bear arms is an outdated one from a bygone era. let it go.

but as to your juxtapositions, the funniest one i can think of are celebrities who wear giant sunglasses-the glasses are SO ugly that people only wear them to hide their faces, so chances are, if you're wearing them, you're a celebrity and will draw paparazzi anyway.

 

[crimson5pheonix]

honestly, i'm sick of people perverting the constitution. the right to bear arms applies exclusively for their use against a corrupt state-guns were to be kept on hand in case the citizenry had to form a militia. now that we have the national guard, which IS our militia, the right for individuals to bear arms is an outdated one from a bygone era. let it go.

but as to your juxtapositions, the funniest one i can think of are celebrities who wear giant sunglasses-the glasses are SO ugly that people only wear them to hide their faces, so chances are, if you're wearing them, you're a celebrity and will draw paparazzi anyway.

Then I say "grrrrr" to you. I like my guns. They're fun.

 

[Divine Miss Bee]

honestly, i'm sick of people perverting the constitution. the right to bear arms applies exclusively for their use against a corrupt state-guns were to be kept on hand in case the citizenry had to form a militia. now that we have the national guard, which IS our militia, the right for individuals to bear arms is an outdated one from a bygone era. let it go.

but as to your juxtapositions, the funniest one i can think of are celebrities who wear giant sunglasses-the glasses are SO ugly that people only wear them to hide their faces, so chances are, if you're wearing them, you're a celebrity and will draw paparazzi anyway.

Then I say "grrrrr" to you. I like my guns. They're fun.

that's because you're texan. *sympathetic shoulder pat*

 

[zehydra]

honestly, i'm sick of people perverting the constitution. the right to bear arms applies exclusively for their use against a corrupt state-guns were to be kept on hand in case the citizenry had to form a militia. now that we have the national guard, which IS our militia, the right for individuals to bear arms is an outdated one from a bygone era. let it go.

but as to your juxtapositions, the funniest one i can think of are celebrities who wear giant sunglasses-the glasses are SO ugly that people only wear them to hide their faces, so chances are, if you're wearing them, you're a celebrity and will draw paparazzi anyway.

Exclusively for a corrupt state? It doesn't say that in the constitution... And also, what would the constitutional right to bear an arm do against a corrupt state anyhow? A corrupt state doesn't obey its own constitution.

 

[crimson5pheonix]

honestly, i'm sick of people perverting the constitution. the right to bear arms applies exclusively for their use against a corrupt state-guns were to be kept on hand in case the citizenry had to form a militia. now that we have the national guard, which IS our militia, the right for individuals to bear arms is an outdated one from a bygone era. let it go.

but as to your juxtapositions, the funniest one i can think of are celebrities who wear giant sunglasses-the glasses are SO ugly that people only wear them to hide their faces, so chances are, if you're wearing them, you're a celebrity and will draw paparazzi anyway.

Then I say "grrrrr" to you. I like my guns. They're fun.

that's because you're texan. *sympathetic shoulder pat*

Well yes, I do live in an awesome state. Thanks for noticing.

 

[Mr.Mattress]

I think responsible people should have guns. If they want a gun, who are you to deny them one? What if they feel safer? That's Great! People should feel safe. What if they just like guns? Pbbt, everybody likes something. What if they're going hunting? Good for you! Enjoy! Taking away a persons gun is like taking away someones Toy or a Video Game Console.

 

[Manhattan2112]

Obviously this is a conspiracy. The 'intruder' in question was in fact an agent dispatched by the Supreme Court in order to convince the people that their ruling was the right way to go. And his 'partner' in question was the real Kennedy assassin. And the 'teen' in question was the Loch-Ness Monster. Duh.

 

[Divine Miss Bee]

honestly, i'm sick of people perverting the constitution. the right to bear arms applies exclusively for their use against a corrupt state-guns were to be kept on hand in case the citizenry had to form a militia. now that we have the national guard, which IS our militia, the right for individuals to bear arms is an outdated one from a bygone era. let it go.

but as to your juxtapositions, the funniest one i can think of are celebrities who wear giant sunglasses-the glasses are SO ugly that people only wear them to hide their faces, so chances are, if you're wearing them, you're a celebrity and will draw paparazzi anyway.

Exclusively for a corrupt state? It doesn't say that in the constitution... And also, what would the constitutional right to bear an arm do against a corrupt state anyhow? A corrupt state doesn't obey its own constitution.

you have to think about the context in which it was written. the american colonists were being MAJORLY oppressed by the british, so they just took all their gripes and things they weren't allowed to do and made a country that let people do exactly that. i'm pretty sure that if the founding fathers saw the way the gun control issue has ended up, they'd never have included it.

 

[Slaanax]

honestly, i'm sick of people perverting the constitution. the right to bear arms applies exclusively for their use against a corrupt state-guns were to be kept on hand in case the citizenry had to form a militia. now that we have the national guard, which IS our militia, the right for individuals to bear arms is an outdated one from a bygone era. let it go.

but as to your juxtapositions, the funniest one i can think of are celebrities who wear giant sunglasses-the glasses are SO ugly that people only wear them to hide their faces, so chances are, if you're wearing them, you're a celebrity and will draw paparazzi anyway.

Exclusively for a corrupt state? It doesn't say that in the constitution... And also, what would the constitutional right to bear an arm do against a corrupt state anyhow? A corrupt state doesn't obey its own constitution.

you have to think about the context in which it was written. the american colonists were being MAJORLY oppressed by the british, so they just took all their gripes and things they weren't allowed to do and made a country that let people do exactly that. i'm pretty sure that if the founding fathers saw the way the gun control issue has ended up, they'd never have included it.

Not to many people can afford to own fighter jets and tanks and defensive arsenal to protect themselves from the government so I don't think the USA has much to worry about unless the Armed Forces decide to break away and take over. Guns are as part of American Culture as anything else so taking them away would cause just as many problems if not more than keeping them.

 

[Booze Zombie]

Banning guns isnt going to help. People who really want to commit a crime are gonna get guns from the black market, and then the people who they attack will be defensless.

Why would the criminals feel the need to use guns if no one else did?
They wouldn't even have a reason to use them if no one else had them...

 

[crimson5pheonix]

Banning guns isnt going to help. People who really want to commit a crime are gonna get guns from the black market, and then the people who they attack will be defensless.

Why would the criminals feel the need to use guns if no one else did?
They wouldn't even have a reason to use them if no one else had them...

Unless they wanted to know for sure that they can overpower anyone they come across.

 

[Booze Zombie]

Unless they wanted to know for sure that they can overpower anyone they come across.

Which they do just fine over here in Britain with crowbars, knifes, big pieces of metal and bats.

Pansy Americans and their guns... beat someone to death already!

 

[Johnnyallstar]

The problem with taking away guns is that Americans will no doubt look to the other places where taking away guns was done, and horrible tragedy followed. Between Stalin (who followed Lenin's gun ban), Hiter, and Chairman Mao you have at least 100 million civilians killed by their corrupt governments, and had nothing to protect themselves with. That was just last century, more than what guns in the hands of civilians have done in centuries. What could have changed if their civilians had the ability to at least protect themselves?

As for saying that it's protection for a corrupt state, it is, but that's only part of their intentions. Yes, it is to be a last resort reset button for the people to enact on an oppressive government. The problem is, if you take guns from the people they have to join the National Guard, who are already in control of the state government, and to be honest, state governments haven't really mattered much since the Civil War.

In short: A civilian with a gun is a free man. You can't force him to do anything you want him to do. He is then somebody you have to deal with fairly, else you reap the consequences.

 

[crimson5pheonix]

Unless they wanted to know for sure that they can overpower anyone they come across.

Which they do just fine over here in Britain with crowbars, knifes, big pieces of metal and bats.

Pansy Americans and their guns... beat someone to death already!

Unless the person you're trying to rob also has a crowbar/knife/pipe/bat. However, if you know the person you're robbing only has that much, and you have access to a gun, which would you choose?