View Poll Results: Are pro-2nd Amendment?

Voters
84. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    77 91.67%
  • No

    7 8.33%
Page 30 of 51 FirstFirst ... 20282930313240 ... LastLast
Results 291 to 300 of 510

Thread: Are pro-2nd Amendment?

  1. #291
    warrior of the wetlands
    TurtleDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Ohio
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:43 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    180,803

    Re: Are pro-2nd Amendment?

    Quote Originally Posted by joko104 View Post
    The Constitution actually says the purpose of allowing firearms is to have an available militia in the event of a foreign invasion or otherwise needing a military at a time when the country had essentially no standing army nor anticipating maintaining one. As a literal interpretation, the government could outlaw any usage, display or unsecured firearm unless a militia is called up. People who push their rights as strictly constitutional right to have any weapon they want for any reason they want have a losing argument. Constitutional qualifier is ONLY for "militia" usage.

    While I support gun ownership and as a fundamental human right to self defense, I also believe proof of competency and knowledge of relevant laws should go along with it. Too many people die by accidents and too many truly stupid, firearm's incompetent and demented people have firearms that have no potential of being used to defend themselves, but only stupidly and in ways that will wrongly hurt others and themselves.
    an argument that finds no support in the documents contemporary to the Bill of rights, the theme underlying both the Bill of Rights and the concept of Natural law and rights that the USC was premised upon, nor the vast majority of law review articles examing the issue and lastly, your claim is contrary to the majority supreme court decisions.

    accidental deaths are less that 1500 a year for 300+ million firearms and more than 80million gun owners. while the rate of gun ownership and the number of guns in the USA has increased the number of accidental shootings have DECLINED

    and subjecting a right to testing is opening the door for those who want to erode the right to do so

    yes, if you carry or own a gun you ought to seek training. if you vote you ought to understand the issues

  2. #292
    Klattu Verata Nicto
    LaMidRighter's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Louisiana
    Last Seen
    07-21-17 @ 02:42 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    30,534

    Re: Are pro-2nd Amendment?

    Quote Originally Posted by Dittohead not! View Post
    Translation: Sure, there have to be limits, but anyone who wants to limit the Second amendment further than I want to is anti second amendment.
    No, there are specific tests for limiting a right. Prior restraint is not an acceptable test, basically that is saying something is too scary or dangerous to be legal, well, you have to prove more than that. Your fear of my guns is not my concern, nor the courts, nor the police or any politician what is a valid concern is if I abuse the right by 1) Making threats with said weaponry 2) Use them against someone without due cause, i.e. first and third party defense 3) Fail to properly regulate(i.e. maintain) my weaponry in a way that could threaten your rights. To my knowledge improperly stored guns won't do you any harm, ordnance however will which is why I do concede that things that blow up are the limit.
    Neither side in an argument can find the truth when both make an absolute claim on it.

    LMR

  3. #293
    Klattu Verata Nicto
    LaMidRighter's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Louisiana
    Last Seen
    07-21-17 @ 02:42 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    30,534

    Re: Are pro-2nd Amendment?

    Quote Originally Posted by ThePlayDrive View Post
    How does saying that mental health professionals should advise lawmakers and judges "setting the line as an anti-second movement".

    Dittohead got it right. You attribute those who disagree with your line as "anti-second". That's incredibly dishonest.
    Because mental health is a subjective science and politicians are barred from infringement. Not that difficult.
    Neither side in an argument can find the truth when both make an absolute claim on it.

    LMR

  4. #294
    Sage
    Dittohead not!'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    The Golden State
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 08:40 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    41,596

    Re: Are pro-2nd Amendment?

    Quote Originally Posted by LaMidRighter View Post
    No, there are specific tests for limiting a right. Prior restraint is not an acceptable test, basically that is saying something is too scary or dangerous to be legal, well, you have to prove more than that. Your fear of my guns is not my concern, nor the courts, nor the police or any politician what is a valid concern is if I abuse the right by 1) Making threats with said weaponry 2) Use them against someone without due cause, i.e. first and third party defense 3) Fail to properly regulate(i.e. maintain) my weaponry in a way that could threaten your rights. To my knowledge improperly stored guns won't do you any harm, ordnance however will which is why I do concede that things that blow up are the limit.
    Bullets blow up, too. So do propane canisters and gasoline tanks, and even aerosol cans. Sounds to me as if you're arguing for prior restraint. Are you secretly anti second amendment?
    "Donald Trump is a phony, a fraud... [he's] playing the American public for suckers." Mitt Romney

  5. #295
    On Vacation
    joko104's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Last Seen
    12-16-17 @ 04:30 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    31,569
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Are pro-2nd Amendment?

    Quote Originally Posted by Dittohead not! View Post
    Bullets blow up, too. So do propane canisters and gasoline tanks, and even aerosol cans. Sounds to me as if you're arguing for prior restraint. Are you secretly anti second amendment?
    Nonsensical argument is just that, nonsensical.

  6. #296
    Klattu Verata Nicto
    LaMidRighter's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Louisiana
    Last Seen
    07-21-17 @ 02:42 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    30,534

    Re: Are pro-2nd Amendment?

    Quote Originally Posted by Dittohead not! View Post
    Bullets blow up, too. So do propane canisters and gasoline tanks, and even aerosol cans. Sounds to me as if you're arguing for prior restraint. Are you secretly anti second amendment?
    Not arguing for any of that at all, what I'm saying is you cannot ban something properly in the U.S. without having a very valid case. Ammunition is not ordnance, neither is a propane cannister or even aerosol cans, ammunition can blow up, but it isn't it's primary function, same with flamable materials. Ordnance has one function, detonate and destroy which is the reason it can be restricted. Improperly storing flamable household items might cause a minor fire or explosion, improperly storing a mortar round will cause a massive one, as well you can't really use most of the crew served weapons for an effective attack without injuring or killing innocents if used properly, unlike a firearm or sword or other small arms. So no, I am not at all sounding anti-second.
    Neither side in an argument can find the truth when both make an absolute claim on it.

    LMR

  7. #297
    On Vacation
    joko104's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Last Seen
    12-16-17 @ 04:30 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    31,569
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Are pro-2nd Amendment?

    Quote Originally Posted by TurtleDude View Post
    anyone who has had any training in this area (as you and I have) know that it is suicide to engage someone who is in the act of deploying lethal force with NON lethal force/ True, if all you have available is a tazer, a can of mace or a rubber bullet, that is better than nothing but its moronic to limit your defensive options to such things. Non Lethal force was designed for LEOs in situations where they were dealing with beligerent, intoxicated or large numbers of disruptive indviduals, not people trying to kill them with effective weaponry.
    Many states outlaw tazers but allow handguns, concealed handgun permits and even open carry. It seems bizarre. The rationale is that Tazers are a rapist's weapon.

  8. #298
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Last Seen
    11-17-17 @ 12:48 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    19,610

    Re: Are pro-2nd Amendment?

    Quote Originally Posted by LaMidRighter View Post
    Because mental health is a subjective science and politicians are barred from infringement. Not that difficult.
    A paranoid schizophrenic with delusions and consistent threats of violence is not "subjectively" violent and I'm sure most psychiatrists would agree. An adult with the mental capacity of a 2 year old is also not subjectively incompetent. You don't seem to understand that mental health professionals aren't just guessing when they make diagnoses, commit patients and make other decisions. There are actual standards. Like grip said earlier, there should be limits to prevent people like Loughner from obtaining weapons.

    Moreover, you do not seem to understand that limiting rights is not an infringement of rights.

    Again, you see anyone who disagrees with you on limits as "anti-second" and that just isn't so.
    Last edited by ThePlayDrive; 01-04-12 at 01:49 PM.

  9. #299
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Last Seen
    11-17-17 @ 12:48 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    19,610

    Re: Are pro-2nd Amendment?

    Quote Originally Posted by LaMidRighter View Post
    Not arguing for any of that at all, what I'm saying is you cannot ban something properly in the U.S. without having a very valid case.
    And mental health professionals can certainly make a valid case. You haven't proven that they can't.

  10. #300
    Klattu Verata Nicto
    LaMidRighter's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Louisiana
    Last Seen
    07-21-17 @ 02:42 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    30,534

    Re: Are pro-2nd Amendment?

    Quote Originally Posted by joko104 View Post
    Many states outlaw tazers but allow handguns, concealed handgun permits and even open carry. It seems bizarre. The rationale is that Tazers are a rapist's weapon.
    I've seen a movement to ban pepper spray and mace, bean bag rounds, etc. It's almost like they want to test the less lethal bans first using odd logic to see where the line is.
    Neither side in an argument can find the truth when both make an absolute claim on it.

    LMR

Page 30 of 51 FirstFirst ... 20282930313240 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •