View Poll Results: Would this compromise be acceptable?

Voters
93. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes. This isnít perfect, but no compromise is.

    12 12.90%
  • No. I donít mind some compromise, but this still takes away too much.

    13 13.98%
  • No. We should never compromise our gun rights.

    61 65.59%
  • No. This still gives too many gun ownership privileges.

    4 4.30%
  • I can hit a target 400 yards away with my eyes closed.

    3 3.23%
Page 10 of 71 FirstFirst ... 891011122060 ... LastLast
Results 91 to 100 of 705

Thread: A proposed compromise on "assault weapons"

  1. #91
    warrior of the wetlands
    TurtleDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Ohio
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:12 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    180,669

    Re: A proposed compromise on "assault weapons"

    Quote Originally Posted by SMTA View Post
    Heh - it does not say no either - fail.
    the incrementalists will never say where the line is breached because to the incrementalists the right diminshes every time another restriction is passed. its the leftwing ratchet of jurisprudence. In the 1920s no one questioned your right to buy a firearm by mail or own a tommy gun. Then in 1934, the most statist president in history (so far) decided to rape the second amendment. Then in 1968 another rape occurred and of course again in 1986 and then 1984. Look at NY-in response to a massacre involving someone who committed capital murder to get a weapon that held 30 rounds they are now banning the sale of anything that holds more than 7 rounds

  2. #92
    Dungeon Master
    Veni, vidi, dormivi!

    spud_meister's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Didjabringabeeralong
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    33,874
    Blog Entries
    8

    Re: A proposed compromise on "assault weapons"

    Quote Originally Posted by TurtleDude View Post
    but you have said owning one single shot rifle would mean you are enjoying your second amendment rights. at what point does magazine restrictions or number of weapons you can own become a violation?

    it seems to me a clear bright line that makes sense is that if CIVILIAN police officers can use something OTHER Civilians should be able to own it
    And so if CIVILIAN police officers have to undergo training to use weapons, then OTHER civilians should have to undergo similar training?
    So follow me into the desert
    As desperate as you are
    Where the moon is glued to a picture of heaven
    And all the little pigs have God

  3. #93
    warrior of the wetlands
    TurtleDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Ohio
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:12 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    180,669

    Re: A proposed compromise on "assault weapons"

    Quote Originally Posted by haymarket View Post
    The Second Amendment does not say that. Feel free to quote from it and show us the parts where it does.
    militia useful weapons was part of the decision. what is more useful than the standard infantry arm of the nation's armed forces?

    I have clearly stated what weapons are clearly protected. I have clearly stated that some weapons are gray area-such as weapons that are in their nature like artillery but can be deployed by one individual. same with ordnance like grenades and rockets. You have yet to proffer a bright line test because I believe you want to generally whittle away at our rights and have a moveable definition that is based on incremental bans-just like your party does

  4. #94
    warrior of the wetlands
    TurtleDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Ohio
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:12 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    180,669

    Re: A proposed compromise on "assault weapons"

    Quote Originally Posted by spud_meister View Post
    And so if CIVILIAN police officers have to undergo training to use weapons, then OTHER civilians should have to undergo similar training?
    we do-to carry them on the streets of our cities like police officers do. as to stuff you keep in your home-no. Most CCW permit holders are safer and better shots than most cops. Anyone who trains both cops and non LEO civilians as I do will tell you that. and when you have people like me who are former olympic level shooters who have law degrees and years of experience in this area of the law-I am way way better trained than cops. I shoot every week. I have cleaned every police or LEO qualification test in my area including the County Sheriff's course and the Federal US Marshalls' Service (where I posted a "distinguished expert" rating-the highest available)

  5. #95
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Last Seen
    01-27-15 @ 11:37 AM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    8,247

    Re: A proposed compromise on "assault weapons"

    Quote Originally Posted by haymarket View Post
    Never heard of it. Could you please provide for us a record of such and the official listing of equipment that a member was expected to provide and bring with them?
    You've never heard of the minutemen? Or the battles at Lexington and Concord? I thought you were a history teacher.

  6. #96
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:39 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    89,853

    Re: A proposed compromise on "assault weapons"

    Quote Originally Posted by TurtleDude View Post
    militia useful weapons was part of the decision. what is more useful than the standard infantry arm of the nation's armed forces?

    I have clearly stated what weapons are clearly protected. I have clearly stated that some weapons are gray area-such as weapons that are in their nature like artillery but can be deployed by one individual. same with ordnance like grenades and rockets. You have yet to proffer a bright line test because I believe you want to generally whittle away at our rights and have a moveable definition that is based on incremental bans-just like your party does
    thank you for making it clear that you cannot cite anything in the actual Second Amendment which supports your view about any supposed right of citizens to have comparable firearms as police officers.
    __________________________________________________ _
    There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs.... John Rogers

  7. #97
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Last Seen
    01-27-15 @ 11:37 AM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    8,247

    Re: A proposed compromise on "assault weapons"

    Quote Originally Posted by haymarket View Post
    There is not one word in the Second Amendment which states anything about owning comparable or same weapons as police officers. I do NOT make a judgment about what weapons people should have.
    Then why are you arguing with Turtledude, telling him that he shouldn't have the same weapons as a police officer? You certainly seem to be making a judgement.

  8. #98
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:39 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    89,853

    Re: A proposed compromise on "assault weapons"

    Quote Originally Posted by Federalist View Post
    You've never heard of the minutemen, or the battles at Lexington and Concord? I thought you were a history teacher.
    The events you mention predate the US Constitution and the Second Amendment. As a history teacher, I knew that. And now you do also.
    __________________________________________________ _
    There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs.... John Rogers

  9. #99
    warrior of the wetlands
    TurtleDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Ohio
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:12 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    180,669

    Re: A proposed compromise on "assault weapons"

    Quote Originally Posted by haymarket View Post
    thank you for making it clear that you cannot cite anything in the actual Second Amendment which supports your view about any supposed right of citizens to have comparable firearms as police officers.
    and you won't even tell us what weapons are protected.

    do you think the weapons civilian police officers are issued are of a lower level of offensive capability than what say my nephew-a captain in the Green Beret used in his patrols in Afghanistan and Iraq?

    what is the purpose of a police issued weapon

    what is the purpose of the second amendment

    its really not so tough a question

  10. #100
    warrior of the wetlands
    TurtleDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Ohio
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:12 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    180,669

    Re: A proposed compromise on "assault weapons"

    Quote Originally Posted by Federalist View Post
    Then why are you arguing with Turtledude, telling him that he shouldn't have the same weapons as a police officer? You certainly seem to be making a judgement.
    the incrementalist attack on the second amendment requires its adherents never to say where the line is crossed because the line changes every time they achieve another infringement of our rights

    got to run

    BBL

Page 10 of 71 FirstFirst ... 891011122060 ... 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
  •