"A Brief History of America"
- Thread starter Esteban Toledo
- Start date
I totally agree. When times change...so should the laws. Ask any military person or law enforcement officer and they will tell you that the only people that should own massive weapons like that are those capable of handling them. In reality I don't think there are any true ways of handling the situation as it stands. It's not going to be possible to make 100 people happy 100% of the time. I used to own a .22 & ghost used to have a 9mm. Since we have a child, neither of us now own a gun because of the risk involved even though we are both responsible and weapons trained. I'm confident enough to feel like I can just pick up a "mickie", sneak up behind said burglar and beat the living snot outta them before they get within 2 ft of my door without having to fire a single shot. Don't think anyone is dumb enough to f*ck with a neighborhood full of Marines. lol
L
loj68
NRRfrogmanP5 said:
make that 3 of us
GI- said:
If our lives are ever in the hands of citizens with no military training and a surplus of guns, god help us. Yeah, I know it worked during the revolutionary war, but back then, the bad guys wore red jackets and stood out clearly. If we were invaded now, Americans would be killing each other at even the hit of suspicion. The post-911 profiling was bad enough.
It is an intellectually immature opinion. Talking about intelligence of people who did anything 250 years ago is not germane to the argument. Their intelligence is irrelevant. The most intelligent person alive in the 1700s could not have successfully predicted the growth of this country into what it is today.
I don't know if you're personally immature or not, but your argument is.
I don't know if you're personally immature or not, but your argument is.
GI- said:
people will defend their country by any means possible when invaded/occupied (look at what's happening in Iraq), there is no need to put it IN THE CONSTITUTION.
Does Canada have this amendment in their constitution? has it ever stopped Canadians from owning guns???
I think the 2nd Amendment should be repealed.
L
loj68
ZoomZoomH said:
AAAAAARRRRGGGGGHHHH!!!! I HATE when people say driving is a privilege....it is no such thing......I have the right to drive around this country on public roads whenever and however I see fit. It's part of living in a free country. Driving is portrayed as a privilige so that "privilige" can be doled (and revoked) at it's discretion. I don't wanna take this off topic but had to comment on that......it is my birthright as an american citizen as is gun ownership and free speech.
responsible driving takes learned skills
no one (save for F1 drivers) is 'born' with these skills
therefore, only those that have been properly trained should he/she be allowed to drive
now replace 'driving/drive' with 'gun ownership/to own a gun'
a privilege is something that is granted upon you once you have shown that you are capable of responsibly handle that privilege.
you have the right to EARN the privilege, not to just HAVE IT outright.
no one (save for F1 drivers) is 'born' with these skills
therefore, only those that have been properly trained should he/she be allowed to drive
now replace 'driving/drive' with 'gun ownership/to own a gun'
a privilege is something that is granted upon you once you have shown that you are capable of responsibly handle that privilege.
you have the right to EARN the privilege, not to just HAVE IT outright.
Hey...I got hit by a teenage driver that never took driver's ed (not that it would've helped) and she saw me coming. She had been in 3 other accidents in 2 mo's...one with serious injury! Another driver that blind sided me was 72 years old, he saw me too but figured I'd move out of his way???!!!! I REALLY think some people shouldn't be driving. It's all fun and games until someone loses their life. Driving is DEFINETLY a privledge. It's your right to get the license after coming of age, but a privledge to keep it after blind siding someone at 70 mph and living to tell the tale.
L
loj68
ZoomZoomH said:
I think we just have differing philosophies here....my idea of freedom is more traditional (in the vein of our founders) and absolute......I prefer not to "socialize" these types of rights and transform them into priviliges to account for people who have no sense.
Wow, came in here kind of late but anyway...
ZoomZoomH, I think you said it well when you said gun ownership should be a priviledge not a right. The risks of having a negligent gun owner outweigh the risks of having a negligent driver by so much!! Cars can kill, yes, but they do have safety measures that are there in case an accident does happen. What safety measure is there for someone who accidentally shoots off their gun at their friend (unless they always wear bullet-proof vests).
I also don't mean to be ridiculing anyone's opinion, but I think it's bad to blindly follow any law, be it a good or bad one.
Humans make mistakes and can't predict the future, that's why things are left so they can be changed. If you're going to follow a law, please try to understand the context around it's establishment, then pick a side.
To argue that your opinion follows the law and because of that you're correct (and others should follow that path) is extremely naive.
If we all agreed with every law, just "because it's the law", then we would have no need to change things, we would keep the same people in office until they died, and we would live in bliss (and ignorance).
ZoomZoomH, I think you said it well when you said gun ownership should be a priviledge not a right. The risks of having a negligent gun owner outweigh the risks of having a negligent driver by so much!! Cars can kill, yes, but they do have safety measures that are there in case an accident does happen. What safety measure is there for someone who accidentally shoots off their gun at their friend (unless they always wear bullet-proof vests).
I also don't mean to be ridiculing anyone's opinion, but I think it's bad to blindly follow any law, be it a good or bad one.
Humans make mistakes and can't predict the future, that's why things are left so they can be changed. If you're going to follow a law, please try to understand the context around it's establishment, then pick a side.
To argue that your opinion follows the law and because of that you're correct (and others should follow that path) is extremely naive.
If we all agreed with every law, just "because it's the law", then we would have no need to change things, we would keep the same people in office until they died, and we would live in bliss (and ignorance).
I know what you mean, it does kind of suck to think that driving is a priviledge that can be taken away. But you know what, this country is built on the idea that everybody has rights, and the government will protect those rights. The judicial system works very well to make everyone happy, that's good, but...loj68 said:
Freedom sometimes is a b****. In protecting everyone from every little thing that disturbs their life we end up with a judicial system that is filled with stupid lawsuits about people getting bit by a dog, or tripping in their neighbor's yard, or spilling a cup of hot coffee on themselves.
In order to protect the bigger freedoms we have to protect all the stupid things too, which is why so many things are a priviledge and you can't just do anything you want without fearing a law suit.
Taking away the right to bear arms is the first step to a totalitarian state. Hitler did it, Stalin did it. Even laws that limit access to firearms are ludicris. When do criminals obey laws? There's plenty of laws already on the books which are abject failures or are not being enforced. Clinton's ban on assault weapons production didn't stop the LA bank shootup. Unless you completely take away guns from everyone(which will NEVER happen), the same problems will be around. Pandora's box is open, guns are here to stay. Like drugs, booze, tobacco, etc, there will always be people wanting guns. The best thing you can do to be safe is to have a bigger gun. "Peace through superior firepower".
L
loj68
therizzzo said:
Yeah, my thinking is along these same lines too...I mean these things are already illegal:
1. Criminals can't own or buy guns
2. You can't shoot a person or at a person or even fire a gun in public (unless in self defense)
3. Kids cannot buy or own guns
The only thing left is to remove guns from law abiding citizens.....I don't see how that can possibly reduce gun crime.
Did anyone not take notice of one of Moores standing points during the movie? The culture in America has turned to nothing but scared parnoid headless people. Honestly, look at some people out there, they'll run from their own shadow...that or shoot it.
What all do you see on the TV everynight? Murder this, crime this, Ohh this pill will kill you, don't stick your finger in your nose or you'll die. Negative...Negative...Negative.
There use to be positive good news on, but you know what? It wasn't get the response that negative press does.
And it is sad that we have become this way. Moore was not hammering in just gun control, in fact he did very little of it. Instead focusing on society as being the main problem here.
Still a good movie, that can atleast open up some people's mind to other alternatives.
What all do you see on the TV everynight? Murder this, crime this, Ohh this pill will kill you, don't stick your finger in your nose or you'll die. Negative...Negative...Negative.
There use to be positive good news on, but you know what? It wasn't get the response that negative press does.
And it is sad that we have become this way. Moore was not hammering in just gun control, in fact he did very little of it. Instead focusing on society as being the main problem here.
Still a good movie, that can atleast open up some people's mind to other alternatives.
NRA member here.
Many of the people who are arguing that the Second Amendment should be taken out of the Constitution have no clue as to American history. Most of you are basing your ideas on high school level knowledge without even giving thought to other factors that contributed to the creation of the Constitution in 1787. Before you make such comments, you have to know what you are talking about, which is wanting badly when people on this board try to pretend that they know American History.
Who ever said that creating more gun laws is not going to do anything to lower crime rates is correct. Gun owners who maintain guns legally are following the law. It is all the P-Diddy, crack head jackasses out there who are using illegal guns to perform illegal acts. If anyone is to blame in the rise of violence and gun violence it is the producers/actors/directors in Hollywood who do nothing but make "how-to" movies about different ways to commit crimes, disrespect the law (and its officers) and tear down the greatness that is the United States of America.
That is the problem that needs to be addressed, not the "sensability" of legal gun owners.
Many of the people who are arguing that the Second Amendment should be taken out of the Constitution have no clue as to American history. Most of you are basing your ideas on high school level knowledge without even giving thought to other factors that contributed to the creation of the Constitution in 1787. Before you make such comments, you have to know what you are talking about, which is wanting badly when people on this board try to pretend that they know American History.
Who ever said that creating more gun laws is not going to do anything to lower crime rates is correct. Gun owners who maintain guns legally are following the law. It is all the P-Diddy, crack head jackasses out there who are using illegal guns to perform illegal acts. If anyone is to blame in the rise of violence and gun violence it is the producers/actors/directors in Hollywood who do nothing but make "how-to" movies about different ways to commit crimes, disrespect the law (and its officers) and tear down the greatness that is the United States of America.
That is the problem that needs to be addressed, not the "sensability" of legal gun owners.
Last edited:
nmaino said:
In case you don't know, the entire (most of it at least, eg Canada) world watches the same "how-to" movies you're talking about. In other countries people are even exposed to more violence and brutal details in the news than we are in this country.
REMillers is right, Moore's conclusion (sort of) in the end was that there was no one thing that explained why the gun violence, that's why he started going into the difference in cultures today.
American's love to worry. We spend all our time worrying about what bad things happen and then preocupying ourselves with trying to be ready for it. Worry, worry, worry...
People have to learn to relax.
