View Poll Results: Are ANY government regulations of the 2nd Amendment acceptable?

Voters
95. You may not vote on this poll
  • No. It's a Constitutional Right & no regulatioins are acceptable.

    39 41.05%
  • Yes. Reasonable regulations are acceptable.

    45 47.37%
  • A law abiding citizen should have the right to own & carry full auto weapons.

    22 23.16%
  • A law abiding citizen should have the right to own & carry flame throwers.

    11 11.58%
  • A law abiding citizen should have the right to own & carry tactical nukes.

    1 1.05%
  • gun restrictions are necessary to prevent unauthorized use by nuts.

    16 16.84%
Multiple Choice Poll.
Page 61 of 69 FirstFirst ... 11515960616263 ... LastLast
Results 601 to 610 of 681

Thread: Should There Be Any Regulations To 2nd Amnendment Rights?

  1. #601
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Last Seen
    12-10-11 @ 02:19 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    5,122

    Re: Should There Be Any Regulations To 2nd Amnendment Rights?

    Quote Originally Posted by Goobieman View Post
    There. You've been proven wrong.
    No, you have expressed your opinion, to which you are entitled.

    I disagree, and find it both unusual and cruel.
    How is it not unusual ? It makes them different from a normal citizen, and from someone who did time (possibly more) for multiple misdemeanors.

    How is it not cruel to disenfranchise your fellow citizen ? How is it not cruel to expect them to live the rest of their lives under "taxation without representation" ? How is it not cruel to callously deprive the citizen of his right to self defense ?

    Remember, the fact that we have been doing it, is not justification for continuing it, in a normative discussion.

    What do you think you gain disenfranchising this citizen ?

    What do you think you gain, neutering this citizen's Second Amendment ?

    If you are going to release a citizen, release them intact, so that they can function as a fully vested member of your society again.

  2. #602
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Last Seen
    12-10-11 @ 02:19 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    5,122

    fyi Re: Should There Be Any Regulations To 2nd Amnendment Rights?

    BTW Goobieman, I apologize for letting my temper get the best of me on post #582.

    I believe I may have forged my point a little too barbed.

  3. #603
    Banned Goobieman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Last Seen
    03-22-15 @ 02:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    17,343

    Re: Should There Be Any Regulations To 2nd Amnendment Rights?

    Quote Originally Posted by Voidwar View Post
    No, you have expressed your opinion, to which you are entitled.
    I disagree, and find it both unusual and cruel.
    Well you're wrong, which I have proven, by stating that you're wrong.

    -Restriticng the voting and gun rights of those that have served their time in prison do not violate the 8th amendment because it is neoither cruel nor unusual.
    -Restricting the voting and gun rights of those that have served their time in prison do not violate the 5th amendment because they are liberties that may be depreived by due process.

  4. #604
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Last Seen
    12-10-11 @ 02:19 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    5,122

    Re: Should There Be Any Regulations To 2nd Amnendment Rights?

    Quote Originally Posted by Goobieman View Post
    -Restriticng the voting and gun rights of those that have served their time in prison do not violate the 8th amendment because it is neoither cruel nor unusual.
    Rather than restate this assertion of your opinion, why not answer the questions, or address my characterization of what I think IS wrong with it ?


    Quote Originally Posted by Goobieman View Post
    --Restricting the voting and gun rights of those that have served their time in prison do not violate the 5th amendment because they are liberties that may be depreived by due process.
    We may be talking past each other here, as I believe I only brought up the fifth with regard to the Sex offender registry. The registry is a pretty clear violation of the 5th, wouldn't you agree ? (Self incrimination)

  5. #605
    Banned Goobieman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Last Seen
    03-22-15 @ 02:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    17,343

    Re: Should There Be Any Regulations To 2nd Amnendment Rights?

    Quote Originally Posted by Voidwar View Post
    Rather than restate this assertion of your opinion, why not answer the questions...
    Under the method you've practiced here, all I need to do to prove my position is to do exactly what I have done.

    I know I am wet because it it raining; I know it is raining because I am wet.

  6. #606
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Last Seen
    12-10-11 @ 02:19 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    5,122

    Re: Should There Be Any Regulations To 2nd Amnendment Rights?

    Quote Originally Posted by Goobieman View Post
    Under the method you've practiced here, all I need to do to prove my position is to do exactly what I have done.
    Did you ever look into what a "normative discussion" is ?

    In philosophy, normative statements affirm how things should or ought to be, how to value them, which things are good or bad, which actions are right or wrong. Normative is usually contrasted with positive (i.e. descriptive, explanatory, or constative) when describing types of theories, beliefs, or propositions. Positive statements are factual statements that attempt to describe reality.

    For example, "children should eat vegetables", "smoking is bad", and "those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither" are normative claims. On the other hand, "vegetables contain a relatively high proportion of vitamins", "smoking causes cancer", and "a common consequence of sacrificing liberty for security is a loss of both" are positive claims. Whether or not a statement is normative is logically independent of whether it is verified, verifiable, or popularly held.
    So, you can see that if we discuss a practice, and how it should be, the tyranny of tradition does not hold sway, and the fact that "it has been done this way" does not carry weight. The question is how should it be done, not how has it been done.

    Your position is no more proved than mine, as both are matters of opinion.

    Mine however, is better supported, as I have supplied my reasoning, and asked pertinent questions.

    Your support, seemed to be quoting precedent, and that carries no weight in a normative discussion.

    Why don't you provide some pertinent answers ?

  7. #607
    Banned Goobieman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Last Seen
    03-22-15 @ 02:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    17,343

    Re: Should There Be Any Regulations To 2nd Amnendment Rights?

    Quote Originally Posted by Voidwar View Post
    Your position is no more proved than mine, as both are matters of opinion.
    So, you admit that you have not proevn your position.
    Gee... I seem to have said that a LONG time ago.

    You can throw your opinion around all you want - if you can't back up that opinion with relevant facts, its just you flapping your gums.

    When discussiing law, the relevant facts are those found in precendent, et al, as that is how the meaning of the law is determined.

    And so, your opinion of how the law should be, especially absemt any -relevant facts- supporting it, is in no way persuasive in a discusion regarding what the law IS.

  8. #608
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Last Seen
    12-10-11 @ 02:19 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    5,122

    Re: Should There Be Any Regulations To 2nd Amnendment Rights?

    Quote Originally Posted by Goobieman View Post
    So, you admit that you have not proevn your position.
    The question is not one of proving. It is a matter of opinion about the best practices. I have provided sound reasoning for my position. Have you ? Or have you merely cited incidents of other people doing what has been the ongoing practice ? Precedent nets you nothing in a normative discussion.

    Quote Originally Posted by Goobieman View Post
    You can throw your opinion around all you want - if you can't back up that opinion with relevant facts, its just you flapping your gums.
    Relevant is a matter of opinion too.

    Quote Originally Posted by Goobieman View Post
    When discussiing law, the relevant facts are those found in precendent, et al, as that is how the meaning of the law is determined.
    When you are discussing what to change about that law, the entire discussion changes. Precedent nets you nothing in a normative discussion.

    Quote Originally Posted by Goobieman View Post
    And so, your opinion of how the law should be, especially absemt any -relevant facts- supporting it, is in no way persuasive in a discusion regarding what the law IS.
    And there is your error. This is not a discussion of what the law IS. This is a discussion of what the law should be. I already know the present state of the law, and that is not what is under discussion.

    I supplied plenty of relevant facts and reasoning. It is you who wants to stick your head in the sand and hold up a sign that says "precedent". It is you who avoids my questions.

  9. #609
    Banned Goobieman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Last Seen
    03-22-15 @ 02:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    17,343

    Re: Should There Be Any Regulations To 2nd Amnendment Rights?

    Quote Originally Posted by Voidwar View Post
    The question is not one of proving. It is a matter of opinion about the best practices. I have provided sound reasoning for my position.
    No. All you have provided is opinion, and then a challenge to show that you are wrong. Your opinion has no relevant fact behind it, and, it being YOUR opion, is up to YOU to supprt, not for others to knock down.

    All you have done is said "I think this, I'm right, show how I am wrong".

    Or have you merely cited incidents of other people doing what has been the ongoing practice ? Precedent nets you nothing in a normative discussion.
    Like I siad:
    You can throw your opinion around all you want - if you can't back up that opinion with relevant facts, its just you flapping your gums.

    that is, I dont really care what you think the las -should- be, unless you can create a substantive, supported argument surrounding it. So far all you have done is expressed your opinion and asked me to show how you are wrong.

  10. #610
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Last Seen
    12-10-11 @ 02:19 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    5,122

    Re: Should There Be Any Regulations To 2nd Amnendment Rights?

    Quote Originally Posted by Goobieman View Post
    All you have done is said "I think this, I'm right, show how I am wrong".
    A simple falsehood, easily demonstrated so. . . .

    Quote Originally Posted by Voidwar View Post
    The fact that we currently punish citizens after release does not justify itself.

    Its just what we are doing now, and that does not add in to a discussion of whether it is the right thing to do or not.

    I disagree with the practice, completely.

    A free citizen has the right to weapons for self defense.
    This need does not go away just because the citizen did time.
    +
    Quote Originally Posted by Voidwar View Post
    As I explained, NO , IT DOES NOT.

    IT is just how we have been doing it so far.

    Your "Consequence", is a violation of the Second Amendment, since we end up with a member of "the people" who's right to keep and bear arms is permanently infringed.

    If you can lose em, THEY ARE PRIVELEGES.

    It is merely how it has been, and it has been an ongoing violation of our constitution. It is not logical to release a man but release him as a second class citizen with a neutered set of rights. We are supposed to have one set of equal rights for all citizens. Citizens convicted of crimes are still citizens. As such, denying them their rights, whether they be suffrage, or the right to keep and bear, or the right to buy a home for sale in an overzealous sex offender bailiwick, is unconstitutional.
    +
    Quote Originally Posted by Voidwar View Post
    I already have shown it. Releasing a citizen with a neutered set of rights is inconsistant with our sytem of law. Citizens have the right to self defense, and the right to use weapons to succeed in that end. Suffrage ? To borrow your tactic of quoting the Declaration, , No Taxation without Representation !! Sex offender crap ? OBVIOUS violation of the fifth and the fourteenth.
    +
    Quote Originally Posted by Voidwar View Post
    No, they are rights, and they cannot be violated after incarceration is over.
    +
    Quote Originally Posted by Voidwar View Post
    False. My reasoning may be simple, but that does not make it unsound. My reasons are mostly quoted directly from the Bill of Rights, or other Constitutional Amendments, but also from documents like the Declaration, and even possibly subjective notions about the spirit of this country. . .

Page 61 of 69 FirstFirst ... 11515960616263 ... 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
  •