Poll: 2nd Amendment bug you? Me too.
- Thread starter Wintermute_
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Vietnam war, the vietkong didn't have tanks or helicopters, they did pretty alright for themselves.TeeBs said:
OT: heroin is illegal people still get they're hands on it. Military Grade guns like for instance the M4 Assault Rifle WITHOUT the limitation that prevents it from being fully automatic still find there way into the hands of criminals. You honestly think that dissallowing guns into the hands of the upstanding citizens. The ones without connections would prevent gun violence? No. That's 8 levels of bullshit. So the gas station operator deep in the slums will have no way of defending himself? Felons already are banned from owning firearms,yet they still have them.
family guy XDPopadoo said:
OT: there are alot of laws that are outdated, like divorce laws. Why is it the male who has to suffer while the female sits around and collects money from him even if it was the female who caused the divorce? And I'm speaking from exsperiance here people.
Revision, maybe. Abolishment, no.
In the event of revolution, the people may be outgunned, but that can't be used as an excuse to take away their attempt to defend themselves.
I think gun owners need to be more strongly educated about their weapons. I also think looneys should be put in the looney bin and not allowed to own a firearm.
In the event of revolution, the people may be outgunned, but that can't be used as an excuse to take away their attempt to defend themselves.
I think gun owners need to be more strongly educated about their weapons. I also think looneys should be put in the looney bin and not allowed to own a firearm.
Where are you from exactly? Just curious.voorhees123 said:
As for the response, I live in an area where a good portion of the people here own a gun. They use them frequently and for both food and recreation. For them, shooting a gun is fun (I don't understand it, but whatever, I'm not them). They've been taught how to properly and safely use a gun since they were little and all of the people I know have a lot of respect for how dangerous the gun is. Some of them are uncharacteristically responsible when it comes to carrying a gun. I am not afraid whatsoever of getting shot. Crimes are going to happen with or without the gun, people who are crazy will just kill someone else by other means (which is one of the reasons I think airport security is so outrageous). Guns are tools that should be used responsibly.
The problem people have with guns and crime is not solved by just taking it away from them. If a kid hits another kid with a toy, you don't just take away the toy, you also have to explain to the kid that hitting people is bad. Otherwise the kid won't know what he did wrong. Guns are similar. You have to teach responsibility with the gun, not just take it away and give a firm smack on the nose. For your stupid people (aka "gangstas"), teaching gun responsibility isn't even the real answer, the problem stems from something much deeper (but that's another topic for another time). Criminals will abuse whatever they can not just guns. If we regulate guns... criminals will still get them.
Now tell me, how many 9-year old children get shot? Guess what? Crap happens! That's life! While I may not agree on some of the details in today's Movie Bob's Big Picture video, he was definitely right when he said "$@*% Happens." It really is tragic when an innocent person gets shot, but we realistically cannot possibly eliminate every single threat to someone's life, and to try would be an endless pursuit with no definite outcome.
The world is not as stable as you think. It doesn't take much at all to start an avalanche of tragedy to happen. Most people like to believe in their stable schedules of going to work everyday and spend the day with their family. Eventually something will happen that will trigger a depression and I'll bet at that point you'll want a gun.
Anyway, back on subject. The constitution wasn't written to make daily life 200 years in the future convenient. It was written to guarantee the freedom and liberty of every human life. The right to bear arms exists to prevent a tyranny. For this reason, the amendment is not outdated, nor will it ever be.
Well that was a mess of a comment. I'm not as good as some of the previous posters at writing down my views. Oh well, I guess you guys get my amateur take on the issue.
So because we don't stand a chance, we should lay down arms and forever forget about even attempting it?Wintermute_ said:
1.) You don't know shit about the laws and restrictions regarding the sale of automatic weapons. Look them up.
2.) "You do not need more than 1-2 guns." That's personal opinion. Hell, I can get up to 5 easily. A .22 rifle and pistol for cheap practice. A hunting rifle for...well..hunting. A shotgun for bird hunting. A .44/.45 whatever pistol for halibut fishing (no...really...you do not want to try and wrestle a 200 pound halibut while it's still alive. People have fucking died doing that)
3.) Collecting "Tools of death" is you trying to force your morality on others. Get that shit out of here. Regardless, there's a lot of history within the realm of firearms that can be appreciated and from my standpoint, I enjoy the mechanical differences.
4.) "What I'm getting at is everyday someone who has a gun uses it for criminal purposes." And knives, and baseball bats, and piano wire, etc. etc. What's your point?
5.) "Furthermore, having a gun or concealed weapon means the likelihood of you firing your gun and killing someone just soared into the realm of very possible" Well no fucking shit. This just in, the likelihood of hitting someone with your car skyrockets when you own one and use it daily.
Yes, there is a huge gun lobby because people like you who don't possess a shred of any sort of logical reasoning capabilities would love to impose unreasonable and badly thought out regulations on the rest of us who enjoy things like hunting/target shooting/collecting/etc. There is such a thing as reasonable regulations like requiring background checks, however people like you are far from reasonable.
Oh, and protip: If you can afford an actual, original, AK-47, then you've got more money than god and probably don't live in a trailer. Like most people who don't know anything about firearms, you're throwing terms around to make the argument sound scary and to make the people who enjoy firearms sound like sociopaths.
In all honesty your post is so barely coherent and flawed I'm almost wanting to report you for trolling. 1/10, you're pretty new to this so do some better research next time.
BTW, here's one for you. How do you explain the fact that firearm ownership has kept rising and crime has kept dropping? Guns are evil and cause so many problems right? Feel free to phrase your answer in the form of derpderpderpderpderp.
Two things you need to read:Wintermute_ said:
This thread, which is quite similar that I started around last month with a crap load of votes:
And this link, which will explain some of the misconceptions you have: Particularly the ones about suppressors and automatic weapons:
http://www.cracked.com/article_18576_5-ridiculous-gun-myths-everyone-believes-thanks-to-movies.html
Seeing as I'm too late to the party to provide a contribution that will be read, I feel this article should be added to the OPWintermute_ said:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1240433/Boy-killed-bullet-fired-2-miles-away.html
I don't understand how anyone can read that and support the ownership of guns, whilst knowing that for as long as people own guns, things like that will happen.
I don't understand how anyone can stand by guns when for every story of someone defending themselves with one, there are five stories of people being accidentally shot. I live in england where we don't have these stupid rules, and very very few people get shot.
but people don't like to give up things that they believe will allow them to have any control over another person. however flawed their beliefs are.
I heard that in Estonia, when you buy a gun, you have to pass a test on it's safety and... get this... accuracy. Or so I heard...
Shirokurou's life lesson: Guns don't kill people, people kill people. A mad-man with a stone is always more dangerous than a pacifist with a gun. Do the right thing, fool!
Shirokurou's life lesson: Guns don't kill people, people kill people. A mad-man with a stone is always more dangerous than a pacifist with a gun. Do the right thing, fool!
owning guns is not a right, it is a privledge. however, we must not outlaw guns, for then only outlaws will have guns
Damn, I was wondering the same thing. Meh, anyways it's fine. Secondly WHEN THE HELL HAS OUTLAWING ANYTHING EVER TURNED OUT OKEY DOKEY!?Skullkid4187 said:
Actually the reason we are having trouble in Iraq is because our commander in chief was phenomenally retarded. You'd think after Vietnam we would know that when you are up against an enemy that relies almost exclusively on sabotage the LAST thing you would want to do is send in an invasion force. Not to mention the fact that we had absolutely no reason to invade Iraq. And the fact that troops weren't deployed until several months after 9/11.The Man With the Soap said:
...not to mention the fact that airport security is still a stupid joke, the fact that the primary objective wasn't to capture terrorists but to secure fuel resources...
You get the idea. You mention that you're a hunter, and be honest, would you use an assault rifle to hunt birds when shotguns and standard rifles get the job done, are cheaper, easier to maintain, and use a more powerful ammunition that comes in handy in case you encounter something more dangerous than a duck?
It's really true. Back then, a gun would let you MAYBE wound a person (or kill them) if they were standing still and drunk. Nowadays, a semi automatic can end lives faster than you can pop popcorn.CitySquirrel said:
I think both the interpretation of the amendment, and the amendment itself are not really positive things in the nation.
Here's something interesting about guns, the most common fatalities caused by guns in America is actually suicide. Think about it, farmers have the highest rate of suicide out of any profession around the world and it just so happens they also have guns for use. So I see it as if they are having it really tough then what would the sight of a gun encourage. Suicide. Because guns are by far the easiest way to kill yourself because it's quick, easy, relatively painless and a high chance of success.
Just something that I feel that doesn't gets any attention when it comes to this second amendment business.
Just something that I feel that doesn't gets any attention when it comes to this second amendment business.
If another US revolution did happen, do you really think that the military would support the government? Think about it, the soldiers are people. People who most likely aren't fans of the government either. I am certain at least half of the military would aid in the revolution, but most likely closer to 80% or more.Wintermute_ said:
As for the 2nd amendment itself, why should we get rid of it? If guns aren't used, knives will be used or some other weapon will be used. Don't blame the tool for the users actions. You can't blame misspelled words on a pencil. It is not the hammer's fault you missed the nail and hit your hand.
We don't need gun control, we need to better control the crazy folks that kill others.
i think the only people who should have guns are those who use them in their work, or in sport like target shooting, and even then they should be hard to aquire.
To quote a wise friend of mine (who was likely quoting someone else himself), "if all people with guns are criminals, then only criminals will have guns."
If guns are controlled in any way, you can bet your ass the actual criminals aren't going to care. They'll go through the same black-market channels and shady dealers that they always have. But people that have guns for genuine reasons -- hunting, self-defense, that sort of thing -- will no longer have them. In other words, gun control would NOT prevent another of these Arizona shootings. Rather, gun control is what CAUSED this shooting to be as bad as it was: If more than one person in that crowd had a weapon, the psychopath could have been downed before the first five people were shot.
Something to think about the next time someone blathers about how gun control would make the country safer. It just means that whoever breaks into your house knows for sure that you won't be firing back on them.
If guns are controlled in any way, you can bet your ass the actual criminals aren't going to care. They'll go through the same black-market channels and shady dealers that they always have. But people that have guns for genuine reasons -- hunting, self-defense, that sort of thing -- will no longer have them. In other words, gun control would NOT prevent another of these Arizona shootings. Rather, gun control is what CAUSED this shooting to be as bad as it was: If more than one person in that crowd had a weapon, the psychopath could have been downed before the first five people were shot.
Something to think about the next time someone blathers about how gun control would make the country safer. It just means that whoever breaks into your house knows for sure that you won't be firing back on them.