View Poll Results: Would you like to see the govt confiscate legally obtained/owned "assault" weapons?

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

    9 7.56%
  • No

    109 91.60%
  • I don't know

    1 0.84%
Page 7 of 19 FirstFirst ... 5678917 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 70 of 185

Thread: Would you like to see the govt confiscate legally obtained/owned "assault" weapons?

  1. #61
    Professor

    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    MI and AZ
    Last Seen
    03-15-15 @ 01:29 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    1,581

    Re: Would you like to see the govt confiscate legally obtained/owned "assault" weapon

    Quote Originally Posted by Federalist View Post
    Why would you consider violating, through contravention, the right of the people in such a manner? The right of the people to keep and bear arms is not contingent on them being members of a well regulated militia.
    I have read it over and over again. It is one sentence. The 2nd describes the reason for the 2nd. It makes it very clear. Often with other rules the reason and justification for the rule is omitted. Not in the 2nd. And it doesnt state that one has to be a member of a militia, but it does state that the state may make you a member of the militia at the states choice. The state made me a member of a well regulated militia when I didn't want to be and even trained me a bit on the use of an assault rifle. (I missed getting a ribbon by one shot placed in the adjacent target.) The 2nd wasn't written to allow rebellion against the state if a group didn't like the state. It was written to provide the state with a militia when necessary.
    (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.)

  2. #62
    Dungeon Master
    anti socialist

    X Factor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Texas Proud
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 04:24 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    44,721

    Re: Would you like to see the govt confiscate legally obtained/owned "assault" weapon

    Quote Originally Posted by OhIsee.Then View Post
    I have read it over and over again. It is one sentence. The 2nd describes the reason for the 2nd. It makes it very clear. Often with other rules the reason and justification for the rule is omitted. Not in the 2nd. And it doesnt state that one has to be a member of a militia, but it does state that the state may make you a member of the militia at the states choice. The state made me a member of a well regulated militia when I didn't want to be and even trained me a bit on the use of an assault rifle. (I missed getting a ribbon by one shot placed in the adjacent target.) The 2nd wasn't written to allow rebellion against the state if a group didn't like the state. It was written to provide the state with a militia when necessary.
    (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.)
    Ok, putting aside the 2nd for a, well, second. What constitutional authority would the government have to take legally obtained and owned property (from those who you don't feel should have a right to mean looking guns)? Any concerns about due process?

  3. #63
    Educator AreteCourage's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Last Seen
    08-30-13 @ 12:34 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    790

    Re: Would you like to see the govt confiscate legally obtained/owned "assault" weapon

    Quote Originally Posted by OhIsee.Then View Post
    I have read it over and over again. It is one sentence. The 2nd describes the reason for the 2nd. It makes it very clear. Often with other rules the reason and justification for the rule is omitted. Not in the 2nd. And it doesnt state that one has to be a member of a militia, but it does state that the state may make you a member of the militia at the states choice. The state made me a member of a well regulated militia when I didn't want to be and even trained me a bit on the use of an assault rifle. (I missed getting a ribbon by one shot placed in the adjacent target.) The 2nd wasn't written to allow rebellion against the state if a group didn't like the state. It was written to provide the state with a militia when necessary.
    (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.)
    You are right on its definition, but what happens when the free state is no longer free?

    It clearly says "free state." I cannot consider the state free if it takes legally owned property from its citizens.
    Libertarian and Atheist...wow I'm a hated man.

  4. #64
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Last Seen
    01-27-15 @ 11:37 AM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    8,247

    Re: Would you like to see the govt confiscate legally obtained/owned "assault" weapon

    Quote Originally Posted by OhIsee.Then View Post
    I have read it over and over again. It is one sentence. The 2nd describes the reason for the 2nd. It makes it very clear. Often with other rules the reason and justification for the rule is omitted. Not in the 2nd. And it doesnt state that one has to be a member of a militia, but it does state that the state may make you a member of the militia at the states choice. The state made me a member of a well regulated militia when I didn't want to be and even trained me a bit on the use of an assault rifle. (I missed getting a ribbon by one shot placed in the adjacent target.) The 2nd wasn't written to allow rebellion against the state if a group didn't like the state. It was written to provide the state with a militia when necessary.
    (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.)
    The amendment commands that the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. It also states that a well regulated (i.e. "in good working order") militia is necessary to the security of a free state.

    Now, if you are advocating that people be drafted into the militia, I suppose then that's a discussion we can have. But whether or not to muster the militia and to draft people into it is a separate question from whether the government may infringe on the people's right to keep and bear arms.

    Your suggestion to forbid anyone who is not in the organized militia from bearing militarily effective arms seems to be a clear infringement on the rights of the people.

  5. #65
    Professor

    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    MI and AZ
    Last Seen
    03-15-15 @ 01:29 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    1,581

    Re: Would you like to see the govt confiscate legally obtained/owned "assault" weapon

    Quote Originally Posted by X Factor View Post
    Ok, putting aside the 2nd for a, well, second. What constitutional authority would the government have to take legally obtained and owned property (from those who you don't feel should have a right to mean looking guns)? Any concerns about due process?
    None. Just the right to have one become a member of our militia. And follow the rules of the militia. I didn't even own a gun and the government made me a member of a militia against my will and did it legally.

  6. #66
    Dungeon Master
    anti socialist

    X Factor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Texas Proud
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 04:24 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    44,721

    Re: Would you like to see the govt confiscate legally obtained/owned "assault" weapon

    Quote Originally Posted by OhIsee.Then View Post
    None. Just the right to have one become a member of our militia. And follow the rules of the militia. I didn't even own a gun and the government made me a member of a militia against my will and did it legally.
    So are you saying that, instead of confiscation, the govt should draft those who have assault weapons into a militia?

  7. #67
    Teacher of All Things


    Josie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    28,347

    Re: Would you like to see the govt confiscate legally obtained/owned "assault" weapon

    Quote Originally Posted by MoSurveyor View Post
    Just to be clear, this isn't a poll about banning weapons, it's about taking them away from lawful owners. I do not believe most people who agree with banning weapons would also agree to the confiscation of legally obtained firearms. There are obviously a few who would like to see it but they're a small minority of the gun control side.
    I guess I misunderstood then. A ban on something would make it illegal to own it, use it, sell it, etc. So if you're for a ban on so-called "assault weapons", then you want them taken away from people who already have them.... don't you?


  8. #68
    Educator
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Last Seen
    02-25-17 @ 07:26 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    805

    Re: Would you like to see the govt confiscate legally obtained/owned "assault" weapon

    Quote Originally Posted by Federalist View Post
    Apparently may civilians, most notably sheriffs and police officers, carry them because they are an effective self-defense tool.
    Self defence against what? Is your country under invasion?

  9. #69
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Last Seen
    01-27-15 @ 11:37 AM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    8,247

    Re: Would you like to see the govt confiscate legally obtained/owned "assault" weapon

    Quote Originally Posted by Viv View Post
    Self defence against what? Is your country under invasion?
    No, not invaders. Self-defense against criminals.

  10. #70
    Educator
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Last Seen
    02-25-17 @ 07:26 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    805

    Re: Would you like to see the govt confiscate legally obtained/owned "assault" weapon

    Quote Originally Posted by Federalist View Post
    The amendment commands that the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. It also states that a well regulated (i.e. "in good working order") militia is necessary to the security of a free state.

    Now, if you are advocating that people be drafted into the militia, I suppose then that's a discussion we can have. But whether or not to muster the militia and to draft people into it is a separate question from whether the government may infringe on the people's right to keep and bear arms.

    Your suggestion to forbid anyone who is not in the organized militia from bearing militarily effective arms seems to be a clear infringement on the rights of the people.
    The poster clearly explained how that is inaccurate. The people were to bear arms in case they should be needed for military service.

    So can they rely on you to nip across to Afghanistan and help sort things out there? With your firearms, which you feel entitled to own and therefore can be called on to use in the service of your country's military...

Page 7 of 19 FirstFirst ... 5678917 ... 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
  •