I feel people should be allowed to have guns as long aspen of the following is true:
-They work for the Government
-Tgey have NO criminal record besides things non-offensive
-They have a permit from the government because they need it for self-defense
-A thorough, THOROUGH background check has been completed.
-They are a legal citizen of the country they are in.
-They are at least 26 years old.
-They get it through a government-sanctioned shop.
And they need to do this again for ammunition.
Holy cow give me some rest people.
This has been on my mind for months, and I just wanted other people's opinions.
Do not break law in prevention of lawbreaking. Under iMtG law nobody has any right whatsoever to prevent produce, trade and possession of anything whatsoever, as produce, trade or possession does no harm to anyone. Forceful prevention of produce, trade and possession of anything is illegal. This is true for guns, drugs, milk, etc.
Sadly, iMtg law is not US or world law. If it was we would be in a MUCH better situation 😉
I'll spend the rest of my life making sure that US constitution is replaced by iMtG law. Also, 4.2 is out.
I noticed. Maybe we should settle a new country with Imtg law?
So what do people think on Fun Rights?
Quote from: Mlerner12 on July 19, 2013, 06:36:21 PM
So what do people think on Fun Rights?
I'm all for Fun Rights! Ain't nobody gunna stop me from having fun!
😑 Shoulda seen that one coming. Gun rights. Gun.
I believe it's an American back bone right to own a firearm , ie 2nd amendment. We should also have less restrictions on the type of weapons, in case our government ever becomes too tyrianiacal to allow to continue. The background check list is a good idea so we have more people with actual training owning them, and to make sure the mentally ill can't get ahold of them. But the current system is flawed.
Guns are what have given this country the freedom that it currently has, and many believe that guns are going to be needed to acquire that freedom again (I for one will be on the giving end of one). There should absolutely be a background check and there should be ZERO gun show loop hole, Arguably even a psychological examination. BUT, on the flip side, citizens should have access to the same fire arms as the government (minus heavy artillery, explosives, etc...) and fully automatic firearms should be WWWAAAAYYYY harder to get than normal firearms (like they currently are). The government is in place to represent of the people and for the people, if they have no fear if the people, than nothing holds them accountable, NOTHING. They are here for US, not the other way around. PROUD GUN OWNER. Ok, done, sorry.
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.
It's time we started treating guns as a privilege, and not a right. How come we have to take a written test, a simulated test, and then are subject to constand monitoring to drive a car, yet a gun can be had without doing any of the above?
I wonder how many "gun owners" would continue to do so if they had to take tests etc for the privilege of continued ownership of their guns??
Owning things is not privilege, it is natural right. Guns are things.
I live in Colorado actually I live a few blocks away from the theatre massacre and that really impacted me negatively I've shot guns I've seen guns I'm fine with being around them my issue is how easy they are for people with mental instability to get a hold of and how there's this ridiculous amounts of ammunition you can buy and large magazines that is in nessicary but I also completely understand the safety a gun could bring to some one so in my opinion stricter laws should be enforced to help from things getting out of hand. There's also no problem with guns it's just the people that use them for wrong things. A gun is a tool and with any tool you have to learn the proper way to use it
I agree, my point simply it should be more of a privilege. Why do we have to prove we can use a vehicle, yet we do nothing to purchase semi automatic weapons?
Quote from: Piotr on July 20, 2013, 04:33:06 AM
Owning things is not privilege, it is natural right. Guns are things.
So are cars, licenses, etc, just dating;)
Quote from: Stoneco1d869 on July 20, 2013, 04:55:38 AM
Quote from: Piotr on July 20, 2013, 04:33:06 AM
Owning things is not privilege, it is natural right. Guns are things.
So are cars, licenses, etc, just dating;)
Exactly. Does that mean that we shouldn't stop people from owning cars and other things? Yes.
You guys do realize you do get visited by the ATF (at least you were supposed to, the scandal there threw a wrench into things) once a year if you own automatic weaponry right?
I understand that a year is a lonnng time, but there are some checks in place. Don't just eat up whatever the news feeds you. When I purchased my rifle at a gun show, there was a background check, and my rifle was immediately registered. There was not however a waiting period, dont agree woth that too much but yeah. They don't just hand you a baby killing machine with heat seeking rounds and shout "have fun killing people!"
Quote from: CbStrad on July 20, 2013, 09:46:28 AMBesides, the right to bear arms, as written in the second amendment "must not be infringed" (can't remember if that's exact wording or not, but it's to that effect)
Just as a formality: if something is written in the US law, doesn't mean that it is right and good. Second amendment is good, but there are plenty of laws in the US which are pure evil.
i bought my glock and took my concealed carry class specifically because of the shooting sprees. you know what, sure you don't go out looking to play hero, but i sure as heck don't want to be another guy in one of those situations that could have taken action.
seriously guns aren't a problem to normal people, it's only those with malicious intent in the first place (which includes mentally unstable) there are plenty of mentally unstable people (not saying they should get a gun) that have never had any malicious intentions.
really what you have to ask yourself is, what's the greater evil and can you or any government really regulate evil?
Quote from: Mlerner12 on July 19, 2013, 05:51:07 PM
I feel people should be allowed to have guns as long aspen of the following is true:
-They work for the Government
-Tgey have NO criminal record besides things non-offensive
-They have a permit from the government because they need it for self-defense
-A thorough, THOROUGH background check has been completed.
-They are a legal citizen of the country they are in.
-They are at least 26 years old.
-They get it through a government-sanctioned shop.
And they need to do this again for ammunition.
Wow...Any particular reason you think that someone in a free country should go through a ridiculous dog and pony show to own a gun? Why 26? Who was your political science teacher?
An extreme intellectual, actually. If you net her, you would understand. But I have reasons. Plus, we need to make SURE they won't, or at least REALLY probably won't, go psycho with it.
Quote from: Piotr on July 20, 2013, 04:33:06 AM
Owning things is not privilege, it is natural right. Guns are things.
That is the smartest thing I have ever heard...ever
Quote from: YOURMOMlink=topic=25715.msg226134#msg226134 date=1374550706
Quote from: Mlerner12 on July 19, 2013, 05:51:07 PM
I feel people should be allowed to have guns as long aspen of the following is true:
-They work for the Government
-Tgey have NO criminal record besides things non-offensive
-They have a permit from the government because they need it for self-defense
-A thorough, THOROUGH background check has been completed.
-They are a legal citizen of the country they are in.
-They are at least 26 years old.
-They get it through a government-sanctioned shop.
And they need to do this again for ammunition.
Wow...Any particular reason you think that someone in a free country should go through a ridiculous dog and pony show to own a gun? Why 26? Who was your political science teacher?
Also, one of the following must be true, not all.
Chuckles, I think all of us need to accept a simple fact here. If you ban guns or place to many restrictions on them 3 things will happen. One, people will be angry. Two less people will probably die, but my bet is crime rates in general will go up, seeing as how criminals don't care in the first place. And I'm willing to bet ou that hardcore gang activity will increase as well, at least guns are usually quick and relatively clean.
On a different note Sweden has the lowest rate of gun related accidents, and crimes.
Funny thing is Sweden has mandatory gun safety and requires every household to have a rifle.
Do my logic is as follows, if a man walked into a school with a automatic weapon and was shot about 60 times by the student body, is it not safer? He'll I beet you people in that school would have a lot less drama since everyone is packing.
One last gun story. Funnily enough any nation that has had a mass genocide of any people started by taking away their weapons, an thus their ability to resist. Now I prefer not being a lemming here, and I like to be paranoid so please just be courteous an respect the rights others.
That is all, oh yeah btw, AMERICA .love. YEAH!!!
Amendment #2... The right to bear arms.
People that flip out about this being in our constitutional rights need to understand this:
That was meant for the REVOLUTIONARY WAR TIME.
It doesnt mean you should have a firearm on your belt as you walk through a crowd of people. That's just dumb.
I should stop posting in these i'm very opinionated.
If I see a wild dog pissing on my front lawn, should I down it from the porch, or would you rather I walk out there and beat it away with a stick, and possibly get rabies. This wussification of America needs to stop, next well be banning q-tips and swimming pools for being hazardous. ,_,
Quote from: Slenderbro on July 23, 2013, 02:11:27 AM
That was meant for the REVOLUTIONARY WAR TIME.
It is in the constitution. Was constitution meant for revolutionary war time?
Quote from: Mlerner12 on July 22, 2013, 11:45:17 PM
An extreme intellectual, actually. If you net her, you would understand. But I have reasons. Plus, we need to make SURE they won't, or at least REALLY probably won't, go psycho with it.
What are your reasons to hurt people unprovoked?
I am saying we should make sure NO-ONE gets hurt unprovoked.
I believe that if you take away guns, murder rate will go UP.
You know what is easier to get then a gun. A knife, a BIG knife, or a butter knife. Someone can come at you with a knife, and you don't have the protection a gun could provide you. Let us say, you were a mousey framed person, not strong. Then a guy breaks into your house with a knife. He is a BIG guy, like Clowny big (USC Linebacker). A mousey guy could hold a gun, point, and protect himself just fine in this situation. But without the security of that gun, he would die.
Quote from: Slenderbro on July 23, 2013, 02:11:27 AM
Amendment #2... The right to bear arms.
People that flip out about this being in our constitutional rights need to understand this:
That was meant for the REVOLUTIONARY WAR TIME.
It doesnt mean you should have a firearm on your belt as you walk through a crowd of people. That's just dumb.
I should stop posting in these i'm very opinionated.
Oh look, this argument again. Of course I don't need to. BUT I CAN BECAUSE IT'S MY .loving. RIGHT. The Bill of Rights was written to protect the rights of citizens. When it was written has absolutely no bearing on what it means. I suppose that free speech and due process are archaic and should be forgotten as well. Checks and balances are given to ensure that one body of government can't become too powerful. The Bill of Rights is the peoples' checks and balances.
Quote from: #noided on July 23, 2013, 10:57:56 AM
Quote from: Slenderbro on July 23, 2013, 02:11:27 AM
Amendment #2... The right to bear arms.
People that flip out about this being in our constitutional rights need to understand this:
That was meant for the REVOLUTIONARY WAR TIME.
It doesnt mean you should have a firearm on your belt as you walk through a crowd of people. That's just dumb.
I should stop posting in these i'm very opinionated.
Oh look, this argument again. Of course I don't need to. BUT I CAN BECAUSE IT'S MY .loving. RIGHT. The Bill of Rights was written to protect the rights of citizens. When it was written has absolutely no bearing on what it means. I suppose that free speech and due process are archaic and should be forgotten as well. Checks and balances are given to ensure that one body of government can't become too powerful. The Bill of Rights is the peoples' checks and balances.
My point is that that's not what it was meant for.
#3 is gone as well, you need to understand why they were written. Yes it is there, no you shouldnt take it literally
The right to bear arms was written for multiple reasons. The most significant of which is the ability to protect yourself and your family. To remove this right ensures that criminals ( people who don't care how many laws you pass) and the government will be the ONLY people having firearms. Precedent for what happens when this is done has been set in both Washington DC and in Juarez, Mexico. Look at the crime rates of both areas and tell me again how making guns illegal protects anybody.
In addition, I love the 3rd amendment. It means that the government can't put soldiers in my home and have me and my wife provide for them at my cost.
Also, another note on firearm rights. It HELPS to protect the country. IF we are invaded, the people can help to defend against foreign adversaries. I for one would gladly defend my country with any of my firearms.
Quote from: Mlerner12 on July 23, 2013, 10:14:27 AM
I am saying we should make sure NO-ONE gets hurt unprovoked.
You are advocating hurting people unprovoked by infringing on their natural right to own things.
When it comes to gun control, crime statistics and lobbyist - they can all be manipulated to prove one point or another. The simple facts are, as Piotr has expressed at length - you have the rights to your person and your property. These rights are inalienable. No one gives them to you, you're born with them. End of discussion.
If you've got no rights to your person or property, your rights are being infringed, you're at the whims of your captures. The bill of rights was the worst thing that ever happened to the constitution. They need not be listed as "rights". A list of "rights" seems as though an entity gives them to you, the idea that Americans have "the most freedom" is preposterous. No government gives you freedoms, just infringes on them.