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 33 of 51 FirstFirst ... 23313233343543 ... LastLast
Results 321 to 330 of 510

Thread: Are pro-2nd Amendment?

  1. #321
    Professor
    iacardsfan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Last Seen
    11-24-17 @ 09:51 PM
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    1,981

    Re: Are pro-2nd Amendment?

    No.

    People do stupid things, if you were not allowed to own guns there would be no need for them for protection. I do not think abolishing it is the way to go, just MUCH stricter laws and regulations on it.

  2. #322
    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 iacardsfan View Post
    No.

    People do stupid things, if you were not allowed to own guns there would be no need for them for protection. I do not think abolishing it is the way to go, just MUCH stricter laws and regulations on it.
    Criminals don't care about what they are "allowed" to do. Gun laws don't stop most of the "stupid" people from getting guns.

  3. #323
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Last Seen
    02-06-12 @ 11:11 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    240

    Re: Are pro-2nd Amendment?

    Yes. Any amendment that would help discourage hardened criminals from entering our neighborhood and robbing me, my family, and even my liberal neighbors, is A-OK in my book.
    Last edited by Sunbelt; 01-04-12 at 07:54 PM.

  4. #324
    Sporadic insanity normal.


    The Mark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 01:46 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    19,736

    Re: Are pro-2nd Amendment?

    Quote Originally Posted by iacardsfan View Post
    No.

    People do stupid things, if you were not allowed to own guns there would be no need for them for protection. I do not think abolishing it is the way to go, just MUCH stricter laws and regulations on it.
    Laws, restrictions, and regulations have not and will not prevent such.

    IMO, beyond a certain point (not sure where that point is), laws and regulations do far more harm than good.

    Especially since they only affect those who abide by the law – and criminals are not members of that group.

    Tight restrictions on heavy infantry weaponry, like crew-served machineguns, rocket launchers, and such, are one thing.

    Bans or restrictions on the type or number of firearms (outside the above) someone can own make no sense, as again, they only affect those who follow the law.

    Or something…
    Education.

    Sometimes I think we're alone. Sometimes I think we're not. In either case, the thought is staggering. ~ R. Buckminster Fuller

  5. #325
    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
    Oh but you are. You have stated that the politicians and judges should pick the psychiatrists to accredit for the purposes of decided who can't have a gun. Psycologists range among the spectrum and there is a more than likely chance of anti-second politicians picking those professionals who have the broadest definition of danger. You are advocating for a door to prior restraint being opened for those who do not respect the amendment to infringe upon it. This is what I am trying to get you to realize, that certain politicians are apt to stack the deck in their favor, judges are not immune to applying biases either. But you are in favor of allowing more gun control, stating many things anti-gun groups have said as well, and these are things that do not pass necessary and proper. I don't care how broad your interpretation of my rights are since you are not in a postition to infringe, however your stance can and often does become overbroad once you grant said powers to politicians. You have used similar defeated talking points, I don't know if that is your opinion or not but the constitution does not allow for most of your stance. There is a due process to remove a right from individuals, and it must still meet tests that are necessary AND proper, either/or is insufficient.
    It's funny to me that you think you're getting me to 'realize' something. I understand your position. I just disagree with it. This seems incredibly difficult for you to handle as you have to dismiss my disagreements by insulting my intelligence instead of dealing with people who think differently. Your argument is that my stance has the potential to be abused by politicians who have a political agenda and you assume that anyone who supports a stance that has the potential of abuse must want the abuse and is therefore, anti-gun and anti-second amendment.

    The problem with this argument, however, is not only that it relies on too many assumptions about the people making the argument, but that it relies on the ridiculous premise that laws should not be made if they have the potential to be abused. Almost every law in the country has the potential to be abused and at some point they will be abused until those who do so are challenged by the public as is done every single day in elections, trials and other venues. In fact, I dare you to name a single law that cannot be abused. You won't be able to. And yet I doubt you would argue that the fact that any and every law can be abused is a reason to abolish all of them because that would be a stupid argument to make.

    Now you might say then that the solution I propose offers a greater chance for abuse than other laws because, as you've said earlier, "psychiatry and psychology are subjective". This subjectivity might lead to greater chances of abuse because one can interpret what constitutes a "dangerous" mental disorder quite broadly. However, the same is true for freedom of speech and freedom of assembly. Both can be restricted by the government and what constitutes a necessary reason to do so requires an immense amount of subjectivity. And even further, the last I checked there wasn't an entire field of research dedicated to determining which sidewalks are appropriate for protests like there is for determining who has the mental capacity of a 2 year old. And yet, we still have those restrictions on speech and when the public feels they are being abused, we take them to court or vote for another person like we do for every single law in our country.

    So, in other words, you're going to have to come up with a better argument than, "But the government might abuse it", because that applies to every law, and so by your logic, no laws should exist which is nonsense.
    Last edited by ThePlayDrive; 01-04-12 at 08:14 PM.

  6. #326
    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
    It's funny to me that you think you're getting me to 'realize' something. I understand your position. I just disagree with it. This seems incredibly difficult for you to handle as you have to dismiss my disagreements by insulting my intelligence instead of dealing with people who think differently. Your argument is that my stance has the potential to be abused by politicians who have a political agenda and you assume that anyone who supports a stance that has the potential of abuse must want the abuse and is therefore, anti-gun and anti-second amendment.

    The problem with this argument, however, is not only that it relies on too many assumptions about the people making the argument, but that it relies on the ridiculous premise that laws should not be made if they have the potential to be abused. Almost every law in the country has the potential to be abused and at some point they will be abused until those who do so are challenged by the public as is done every single day in elections, trials and other venues. In fact, I dare you to name a single law that cannot be abused. You won't be able to. And yet I doubt you would argue that the fact that any and every law can be abused is a reason to abolish all of them because that would be a stupid argument to make.

    Now you might say then that the solution I propose offers a greater chance for abuse than other laws because, as you've said earlier, "psychiatry and psychology are subjective". This subjectivity might lead to greater chances of abuse because one can interpret what constitutes a "dangerous" mental disorder quite broadly. However, the same is true for freedom of speech and freedom of assembly. Both can be restricted by the government and what constitutes a necessary reason to do so requires an immense amount of subjectivity. And even further, the last I checked there wasn't an entire field of research dedicated to determining which sidewalks are appropriate for protests like there is for determining who has the mental capacity of a 2 year old. And yet, we still have those restrictions on speech and when the public feels they are being abused, we take them to court or vote for another person like we do for every single law in our country.

    So, in other words, you're going to have to come up with a better argument than, "But the government might abuse it", because that applies to every law, and so by your logic, no laws should exist which is nonsense.
    That's a whole lotta disagreeing for a guy who is "pro-second". Too bad you're wrong, but you can disagree all you want.
    Neither side in an argument can find the truth when both make an absolute claim on it.

    LMR

  7. #327
    Sage

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

    Re: Are pro-2nd Amendment?

    So no argument then. Thank you for your time.

  8. #328
    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
    So no argument then. Thank you for your time.
    Argue with what? You used a lot of words and haven't proven anything. You are wrong.
    Neither side in an argument can find the truth when both make an absolute claim on it.

    LMR

  9. #329
    Sage

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

    Re: Are pro-2nd Amendment?

    Okay.

    ---------

  10. #330
    Sporadic insanity normal.


    The Mark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 01:46 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    19,736

    Re: Are pro-2nd Amendment?

    So, a quick question for TPD and LMR:

    To preface, I know little about firearms, having never fired one in my life (really!), and the only knowledge I have is from reading/listening to people.

    The setting:

    If, for example, I had the option to visit a local gun shop.

    At this gun shop, I was able to submit to a 15-min background check, whereupon I could walk out with a .45 caliber semi-automatic handgun and 500 rounds of ammo for it, of varying types, along with a laser sight attachment, a shoulder holster, and two gun safes, one for my car and one for my place of residence (I’m making this up as I go along, not sure if all this is necessary).

    Granted, this would probably cost me a thousand or so bucks that I don’t have (I only have a vague idea how much these things cost), but we’re talking examples here.

    The question: Is this acceptable to you, and/or what would you prefer went differently
    Education.

    Sometimes I think we're alone. Sometimes I think we're not. In either case, the thought is staggering. ~ R. Buckminster Fuller

Page 33 of 51 FirstFirst ... 23313233343543 ... 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
  •