View Poll Results: Do you think the second amendment needs amended?

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

    15 20.00%
  • No

    59 78.67%
  • Not sure

    1 1.33%
Page 51 of 136 FirstFirst ... 41495051525361101 ... LastLast
Results 501 to 510 of 1352

Thread: Do you think the second amendment needs amended?

  1. #501
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:21 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    90,037

    Re: Do you think the second amendment needs amended?

    Quote Originally Posted by TurtleDude View Post
    the irony in this claim is hilarious. your posts constantly avoid answering straight questions

    why does Reagan matter at all

    was he a constitutional scholar-NO

    was he an expert on firearms-NO

    was he a military expert-NO

    he doesn't matter
    WoW!!!! How quick the worm turns. Once upon a time the far right idolized Reagan and considered him as a bosom buddy. Now he was a senile old man who does not matter. Amazing!!!!!!!
    __________________________________________________ _
    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

  2. #502
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:21 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    90,037

    Re: Do you think the second amendment needs amended?

    Quote Originally Posted by TurtleDude View Post
    as long as there are people who want to strip us of our rights for dishonest or nefarious reasons, we need to be well armed
    So you can kill them over a dispute about public policy.
    __________________________________________________ _
    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

  3. #503
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:21 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    90,037

    Re: Do you think the second amendment needs amended?

    Quote Originally Posted by Lursa View Post
    Men dont need muscle cars either. People dont 'need' 4-wheelers, they can get around perfectly find with a 4WD SUV.

    Who needs a $6000 Fendi bag? Did I miss where anyone needs personal 4 or 6 seater airplanes?

    In America, it's called 'free will' and 'personal liberty.' (And before you try it, lots of these things, named and unnamed, can kill if used improperly).
    I would urge you to find out where Ronald Reagan is buried - I believe it is in California - visit there and place your concerns on his grave and wait for a response.
    __________________________________________________ _
    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

  4. #504
    Sage
    Lursa's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Outside Seattle
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:30 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    29,975

    Re: Do you think the second amendment needs amended?

    Quote Originally Posted by haymarket View Post
    I would urge you to find out where Ronald Reagan is buried - I believe it is in California - visit there and place your concerns on his grave and wait for a response.
    Since I showed how invalid your post was, and you could not uphold it further, this is the kind of response I expect. Empty.
    Quote Originally Posted by Bucky View Post
    I have felt pain when I was in the womb. So when you say they are incapable of feeling pain, that is based on junk science.
    Quote Originally Posted by applejuicefool View Post
    A murderer putting a bullet through someone's brain is a medical procedure too.

  5. #505
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    United States
    Last Seen
    01-21-16 @ 12:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    51,124

    Re: Do you think the second amendment needs amended?

    Quote Originally Posted by haymarket View Post
    Actually nuclear weapons are indeed arms and Pirate corrected you on this with lots of evidence when this came up before.
    Nuclear weapons are arms but they are not protected by the 2nd because they are not militia weapons, they are not 'in common use that the time' and they're 'dangerous and unusual'.

    DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA et al. v. HELLER
    ....We also recognize another important limitation on the right to keep and carry arms. Miller said, as we have explained, that the sorts of weapons protected were those "in common use at the time." 307 U. S., at 179. We think that limitation is fairly supported by the historical tradition of prohibiting the carrying of ""dangerous and unusual weapons"."

    ~snip~

    It may be objected that if weapons that are most useful in military service--M-16 rifles and the like--may be banned, then the Second Amendment right is completely detached from the prefatory clause. But as we have said, the conception of the militia at the time of the Second Amendment's ratification was the body of all citizens capable of military service, who would bring the sorts of lawful weapons that they possessed at home to militia duty. It may well be true today that a militia, to be as effective as militias in the 18th century, would require sophisticated arms that are highly unusual in society at large. Indeed, it may be true that no amount of small arms could be useful against modern-day bombers and tanks. But the fact that modern developments have limited the degree of fit between the prefatory clause and the protected right cannot change our interpretation of the right.
    In order to be a protected, a weapon must be both 1."in common use at the time", and may not be 2. "dangerous and unusual". If a given weapon fails one or both of these qualifications, it is not protected for civilian ownership.
    So, let's go down the list:

    • Non-lethal weapons (ie; paint-ball guns, tazers): In common use at the time? Yes. Is dangerous and unusual? No.
    • Ranged weapons (ie; bow, crossbow, sling-shot): In common use at the time? Yes. Is dangerous and unusual? No.
    • Melee weapons (knives, axes, saps, baton): In common use at the time? Yes. Is dangerous and unusual? No.
    • Pistol: In common use at the time? Yes. Is dangerous and unusual? No.
    • Rifle/shotgun: In common use at the time? Yes. Is dangerous and unusual? No.
    • Assault-rifle: In common use at the time? Yes. Is dangerous and unusual? No.
    • Machine-gun: In common use at the time? Yes. Is dangerous and unusual? No.
    • Hand grenade: In common use at the time? Yes. Is dangerous and unusual? Yes.
    • Grenade launcher: In common use at the time? Yes. Is dangerous and unusual? Yes.
    • Rocket launcher: In common use at the time? Yes. Is dangerous and unusual? Yes.
    • Patriot missile battery: In common use at the time? No. Is dangerous and unusual? Yes.
    • Nuclear/radiological weapons: In common use at the time? No. Is dangerous and unusual? Yes.
    • Lethal Biological/Chemical weapons: In common use at the time? No. Is dangerous and unusual? Yes
    • Non-Lethal Chemical weapons (ie; tear-gas, pepper-spray): In common use at the time? Yes. Is dangerous and unusual? No
    • Crack Cocaine: In common use at the time: No. Is dangerous and unusual: Yes.
    • Methamphetamine: In common use at the time: No. Is dangerous and unusual: Yes.
    • Meth-lab: In common use at the time: No. Is dangerous and unusual: Yes.
    • ICBMs: In common use at the time? No. Is dangerous and unusual? Yes.


    Accessories are not 'arms' but if we are to judge accessories by the same rule, then...

    • Detachable Magazine: In common use at the time? Yes. Is dangerous and unusual? No.
    • 30rnd Magazine: In common use at the time? Yes. Is dangerous and unusual? No.
    • 60/100rnd Magazine: In common use at the time? No. Is dangerous and unusual? No.
    • 100/200rnd linked (belt-fed) ammo: In common use at the time? Yes. Is dangerous and unusual? No.
    • Pistol Grip: In common use at the time? Yes. Is dangerous and unusual? No.
    • Forward Grip: In common use at the time? Yes. Is dangerous and unusual? No.
    • Telescopic/folding but-stock: In common use at the time? Yes. Is dangerous and unusual? No
    • Rifle Barrel under 18in: In common use at the time? Yes. Is dangerous and unusual? No.
    • Flash Suppressor: In common use at the time? Yes. Is dangerous and unusual? No.
    • Sound Suppressor: In common use at the time? Yes. Is dangerous and unusual? No.



    Tanks are not weapons. Tanks are vehicles weapons can be mounted on, and anyone with enough money to buy one can own a tank. That does not mean you can have a functioning cannon, 50cal machine gun, 2 saw machine guns, or grenades...it means you can have the tank and the tank only. You can own a black hawk helicopter, also...doesn't mean you can have the twin mini-guns.


  6. #506
    Tavern Bartender
    Constitutionalist
    American's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Virginia
    Last Seen
    12-15-17 @ 10:49 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    76,323

    Re: Do you think the second amendment needs amended?

    Quote Originally Posted by Boo Radley View Post
    Does it, or is that merely an exaggeration?
    Oh please, when you guys talk compromise with the conservatives, it just means them giving in.
    "He who does not think himself worth saving from poverty and ignorance by his own efforts, will hardly be thought worth the efforts of anybody else." -- Frederick Douglass, Self-Made Men (1872)
    "Fly-over" country voted, and The Donald is now POTUS.

  7. #507
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:21 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    90,037

    Re: Do you think the second amendment needs amended?

    Quote Originally Posted by Lursa View Post
    Since I showed how invalid your post was, and you could not uphold it further, this is the kind of response I expect. Empty.
    You argued with President Reagan.
    __________________________________________________ _
    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

  8. #508
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:21 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    90,037

    Re: Do you think the second amendment needs amended?

    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry View Post
    Nuclear weapons are arms but they are not protected by the 2nd because they are not militia weapons, they are not 'in common use that the time' and they're 'dangerous and unusual'.
    The Second Amendment has none of those restrictions you mentioned.
    __________________________________________________ _
    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. #509
    Sage
    Montecresto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Last Seen
    03-13-16 @ 11:59 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    24,561

    Re: Do you think the second amendment needs amended?

    Quote Originally Posted by TurtleDude View Post
    as long as there are people who want to strip us of our rights for dishonest or nefarious reasons, we need to be well armed
    That doesn't have to become an eventuality you know. And if it ever did, either side could easily be that belligerent, though I suspect you believe it could only come from one. It requires diligence, involvement, skin in the game essentially, but it's only a Republic if you can keep it. And whether you keep it or loose it is decided way before the shooting begins. No room for the complacent or disinterested.
    Killing one person is murder, killing 100,000 is foreign policy

  10. #510
    Sage
    Montecresto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Last Seen
    03-13-16 @ 11:59 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    24,561

    Re: Do you think the second amendment needs amended?

    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry View Post
    Sure but the original statement you disagreed with was having US Air Marshals armed. US Air Marshals will be using fragmenting bullets.
    Actually, my original statement was no guns on board planes, to include air Marshall's. If they did get into a gun fight, hijackers, or "terrorists" wouldn't be using "safe" bullets. It's actually possible to keep guns off of airplanes. It does require competent people going about it. Not like the madam protecting the president, lol.
    Killing one person is murder, killing 100,000 is foreign policy

Page 51 of 136 FirstFirst ... 41495051525361101 ... 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
  •