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 67 of 69 FirstFirst ... 17576566676869 LastLast
Results 661 to 670 of 681

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

  1. #661
    Guru
    repeter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    California
    Last Seen
    07-15-14 @ 12:06 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    3,445

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

    Quote Originally Posted by other View Post
    Possession of a pencil by a clinically insane person can endanger people too.
    That's besides the point.
    Veni. Vidi. Vici.
    -Gaius Julius Caesar
    The Only Thing to Fear is Fear Itself.
    -Franklin Delano Roosevelt

  2. #662
    Professor
    other's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    VA
    Last Seen
    01-22-14 @ 11:01 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    1,473

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

    Quote Originally Posted by repeter View Post
    That's besides the point.
    how so?

    You said that guns in the hands of a dangerous individual (crazies, felons, etc.) endanger folks.

    Well, the simple fact is that, guns aside, it is the crazies & felons THEMSELVES that actually endanger people, not the guns.

    Guns may be used for protection or in a crime. Criminalizing (or over restricting) them only closes the former option--that's not a good thing. As you said: "Simple possesion of a firearm by a clinically insane person does endanger people." I say, all the more reason that I should be able to carry one if I so choose-- to protect myself (which is my right--and yours).
    Last edited by other; 09-25-09 at 11:40 PM.

  3. #663
    Global Moderator
    The Hammer of Chaos
    Goshin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Dixie
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    44,159

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

    Quote Originally Posted by repeter View Post
    That's besides the point.
    Not entirely...

    A man who knows what he is doing can kill you with a pencil.

    However, lets address the issue of the "clinically insane" and guns.

    The devil is in the details, as usual.

    Who defines what is clinically insane?

    As my Psyche 101 Prof was fond of saying, "the difference between you and the guy in the crazy house is a question of degree."

    Almost everyone has some symptoms of some neurosis, anxiety, phobia, stress disorder, etc. There are levels: some are self-manageable; some of treatable with therapy; some require meds to function; some are nonfunctional or dangerous and are institutionalized.

    Which categories should be denied the use of arms?

    The institutionalized of course...but what if later they are pronounced "cured" and released?

    What about those who take meds for schizophrenia? I've known some. On meds and off-meds, they are different people...but a lot of them are not good about staying on their meds.

    Some people are on meds for something, like anxiety or PTSD, but aren't necessarily DANGEROUS even if they are off their meds. What about them? Who decides?

    Right NOW, millions of vets are potentially subject to losing their 2A rights due to having PTSD.... they are not necessarily DANGEROUS but could have their rights stripped just because.

    Where do we draw the line?

    This (insanity argument) is another issue where caution is indicated. The slippery slope is not a fallacy if someone is pushing an agenda.

    Fiddling While Rome Burns
    ISIS: Carthago Delenda Est
    "I used to roll the dice; see the fear in my enemies' eyes... listen as the crowd would sing, 'now the old king is dead, Long Live the King.'.."

  4. #664
    Guru
    repeter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    California
    Last Seen
    07-15-14 @ 12:06 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    3,445

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

    Quote Originally Posted by other View Post
    how so?

    You said that guns in the hands of a dangerous individual (crazies, felons, etc.) endanger folks.

    Well, the simple fact is that, guns aside, it is the crazies & felons THEMSELVES that actually endanger people, not the guns.

    Guns may be used for protection or in a crime. Criminalizing (or over restricting) them only closes the former option--that's not a good thing. As you said: "Simple possesion of a firearm by a clinically insane person does endanger people." I say, all the more reason that I should be able to carry one if I so choose-- to protect myself (which is my right--and yours).
    What I'm arguing is that the gun makes it a whole lot easier for a person who is crazy to kill you. Yeah, a guy with a pencil can kill you, but he'll most likely have to work much harder then he would have to with a gun.
    Veni. Vidi. Vici.
    -Gaius Julius Caesar
    The Only Thing to Fear is Fear Itself.
    -Franklin Delano Roosevelt

  5. #665
    Guru
    repeter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    California
    Last Seen
    07-15-14 @ 12:06 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    3,445

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Goshin View Post
    Not entirely...

    A man who knows what he is doing can kill you with a pencil.

    However, lets address the issue of the "clinically insane" and guns.

    The devil is in the details, as usual.

    Who defines what is clinically insane?

    As my Psyche 101 Prof was fond of saying, "the difference between you and the guy in the crazy house is a question of degree."

    Almost everyone has some symptoms of some neurosis, anxiety, phobia, stress disorder, etc. There are levels: some are self-manageable; some of treatable with therapy; some require meds to function; some are nonfunctional or dangerous and are institutionalized.

    Which categories should be denied the use of arms?

    The institutionalized of course...but what if later they are pronounced "cured" and released?

    What about those who take meds for schizophrenia? I've known some. On meds and off-meds, they are different people...but a lot of them are not good about staying on their meds.

    Some people are on meds for something, like anxiety or PTSD, but aren't necessarily DANGEROUS even if they are off their meds. What about them? Who decides?

    Right NOW, millions of vets are potentially subject to losing their 2A rights due to having PTSD.... they are not necessarily DANGEROUS but could have their rights stripped just because.

    Where do we draw the line?

    This (insanity argument) is another issue where caution is indicated. The slippery slope is not a fallacy if someone is pushing an agenda.
    Okay, quite honestly, I don't know how to specifically define a clinically insane person. When I refer to a clinically insane person, I'm talking about Virginia Tech, if that is any indicator.

    For the most part, consider this what I'm using as a definition: [ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insanity"]Insanity[/ame]
    Veni. Vidi. Vici.
    -Gaius Julius Caesar
    The Only Thing to Fear is Fear Itself.
    -Franklin Delano Roosevelt

  6. #666
    Global Moderator
    The Hammer of Chaos
    Goshin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Dixie
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    44,159

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

    Quote Originally Posted by repeter View Post
    Okay, quite honestly, I don't know how to specifically define a clinically insane person. When I refer to a clinically insane person, I'm talking about Virginia Tech, if that is any indicator.

    For the most part, consider this what I'm using as a definition: Insanity
    As long as we are defining someone as "too insane to exercise the right to bear arms" as someone who is demonstrably DANGEROUS, I'm okay with that.

    We just have to be aware that there are those who oppose gun rights who'd like to take that football and run with it, and ban millions or tens of millions of people from arms whose only fault is, they take mild medications for anxiety attacks or came home from war with a little PTSD.

    Fiddling While Rome Burns
    ISIS: Carthago Delenda Est
    "I used to roll the dice; see the fear in my enemies' eyes... listen as the crowd would sing, 'now the old king is dead, Long Live the King.'.."

  7. #667
    Guru
    repeter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    California
    Last Seen
    07-15-14 @ 12:06 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    3,445

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Goshin View Post
    As long as we are defining someone as "too insane to exercise the right to bear arms" as someone who is demonstrably DANGEROUS, I'm okay with that.

    We just have to be aware that there are those who oppose gun rights who'd like to take that football and run with it, and ban millions or tens of millions of people from arms whose only fault is, they take mild medications for anxiety attacks or came home from war with a little PTSD.
    Yeah, I'm not trying to take it that far, just so the actual crazy people can't legally get guns and shoot up schools.
    Veni. Vidi. Vici.
    -Gaius Julius Caesar
    The Only Thing to Fear is Fear Itself.
    -Franklin Delano Roosevelt

  8. #668
    Professor
    other's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    VA
    Last Seen
    01-22-14 @ 11:01 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    1,473

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

    Quote Originally Posted by repeter View Post
    What I'm arguing is that the gun makes it a whole lot easier for a person who is crazy to kill you. Yeah, a guy with a pencil can kill you, but he'll most likely have to work much harder then he would have to with a gun.
    So what do you think should be done about this?

    Restrict everyone else's ability to defend themselves against a madman or a criminal with a gun? If so, you aren't really making him work harder to kill you, you're making it harder for people to defend themselves.

  9. #669
    Guru
    repeter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    California
    Last Seen
    07-15-14 @ 12:06 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    3,445

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

    Quote Originally Posted by other View Post
    So what do you think should be done about this?

    Restrict everyone else's ability to defend themselves against a madman or a criminal with a gun? If so, you aren't really making him work harder to kill you, you're making it harder for people to defend themselves.
    No, what I want is to restrict his ability to kill someone, in the form of making it harder for him to get a gun. As for everyone else, they can keep their guns.
    Veni. Vidi. Vici.
    -Gaius Julius Caesar
    The Only Thing to Fear is Fear Itself.
    -Franklin Delano Roosevelt

  10. #670
    ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ!
    stevenb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Gilbert, Az
    Last Seen
    11-28-09 @ 08:32 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    1,560

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

    Quote Originally Posted by repeter View Post
    No, what I want is to restrict his ability to kill someone, in the form of making it harder for him to get a gun. As for everyone else, they can keep their guns.
    Unfortunately, you cannot do that without restricting the rights of those who have the right to purchase firearms.

    it's like.. saying...

    "I want to make it so that a fat kid cannot get a soda." -- So you ban soda in schools.

    What does the kid do? He goes to the nearest convenience store and gets some soda to bring to school anyway.

    So... the next logical step in your guy's opinion (gun grabbers / soda grabbers haha)... is to ban convenience stores from selling specific types of soda / beverages.

    Now you're not just restricting the rights of the fat kid.. you're restricting them unconstitutionally for everyone else too.

    Much like Ikari has said over and over and over and over in this thread.

    We live in a free country, it's not supposed to be absolutely safe, that's the cost of living in a free country.
    George Washington didn't use his freedom of speech to win the war with Britain... He shot them.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •