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 7 of 69 FirstFirst ... 567891757 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 70 of 681

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

  1. #61
    Sporadic insanity normal.


    The Mark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:25 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    19,754

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Devil505 View Post
    Why would any citizen need military style weapons of war?
    To protect themselves if an invasion occurs...the "militia" bit in the 2nd, I think. And to ensure that our government is not overwhelmingly more powerful then their citizens, thus ensuring that not only do we have the right and duty to revolt, but that we are capable of it.

    Quote Originally Posted by Devil505 View Post
    What possible good can come from full auto weapons being readily available to nuts?
    Nothing. Restrictions on some or all firearms for someone who is unquestionably dangerous even without them seems reasonable to me. The problem with that is defining "unquestionably dangerous" to prevent abuse of such restrictions by the government.

    Quote Originally Posted by Devil505 View Post
    I was a DEA Agent & we very rarely took anything in the field other than pump action shotguns. (that was a while ago & admittedly things have gotten more violent since then)
    BUT
    Even police are typically not faced with numbers of murderous criminals that need to be killed, other than terrorists or N. Hollywood type criminal madmen or the Miami FBI shootings, which are thankfully very rare occurrences.
    Well...

    A thought: If we restrict more dangerous weapons to those who can demonstrate that they are trained in their use and safety, then having citizens near such a situation with such weapons who could take out such persons even before the law enforcement agents got there would both reduce the likelihood of such persons deciding to do such and potentially reduce the level of damage they could do if they did decide to do such.

    Quote Originally Posted by Devil505 View Post
    I see no societal benefit for military type weapons being easier to get by the average citizen.
    My previous responses would seem to be societal benefits, if viewed from one perspective.

    Quote Originally Posted by Devil505 View Post
    Criminals will be able to get any weapon they want. The real dangers to society are the Columbine type whack jobs who are suicidal anyway & just want to kill! Imagine how many more bodies would there have been if the Columbine killers had access to fully automatic weapons?!?
    Well, I see no reason that private and/or public places cannot restrict the firearms they allow onto their grounds. How hard is it to put security in place? And having metal detectors in place and security guards would discourage such persons as the "Columbine killers", I would think. Nothing can really stop someone who wants to do such from doing it. Criminals can get any weapon they want if they are willing to ignore laws...and since they are criminals, why not?
    Education.

    Sometimes I think we're alone. Sometimes I think we're not. In either case, the thought is staggering. ~ R. Buckminster Fuller

  2. #62
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Masschusetts
    Last Seen
    03-01-14 @ 10:44 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    3,512

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

    Quote Originally Posted by The Mark View Post
    To protect themselves if an invasion occurs...the "militia" bit in the 2nd, I think. And to ensure that our government is not overwhelmingly more powerful then their citizens, thus ensuring that not only do we have the right and duty to revolt, but that we are capable of it.
    So citizens should own nukes, aircraft carriers & tanks to even the playing field to fight our government's military?
    .


    Quote Originally Posted by The Mark View Post
    Well...

    A thought: If we restrict more dangerous weapons to those who can demonstrate that they are trained in their use and safety, then having citizens near such a situation with such weapons who could take out such persons even before the law enforcement agents got there would both reduce the likelihood of such persons deciding to do such and potentially reduce the level of damage they could do if they did decide to do such.
    So we have war zones in every city in the country?






    Quote Originally Posted by The Mark View Post
    Well, I see no reason that private and/or public places cannot restrict the firearms they allow onto their grounds. How hard is it to put security in place? And having metal detectors in place and security guards would discourage such persons as the "Columbine killers", I would think. Nothing can really stop someone who wants to do such from doing it. Criminals can get any weapon they want if they are willing to ignore laws...and since they are criminals, why not?
    How long do you think it would have taken Dillon & Clybolt (?) to kill any armed guards at Columbine?
    Should we post what would amount to private army units at every public school, shopping center, etc throughout the country?

  3. #63
    Sporadic insanity normal.


    The Mark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:25 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    19,754

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Devil505 View Post
    So citizens should own nukes, aircraft carriers & tanks to even the playing field to fight our government's military?
    Nukes and aircraft carriers are strategic weapons. I was referring more to tactical weapons.
    And I didn't say "even the playing field". I said "prevent from becoming overwhelmingly more powerful".

    If someone has the resources and can pass tests for safety and training with a given weapon, then their ownership of said weapon should be allowed, (barring a background check for more dangerous ones?). Tanks are on the border between strategic and tactical, I think.

    Edit: Further, using a nuke or even warplanes on your own citizens would vastly reduce your standing among the world, I would think. Barring really extreme circumstances.

    Quote Originally Posted by Devil505 View Post
    So we have war zones in every city in the country?
    Only if someone tries to commit a terrorist like act. Did you read my reasoning as to the reduced potential for such an act, if such persons knew people in the area were so armed? Did you read my statements regarding training and safety test requirements for higher power weapons?
    Further, are there not currently areas in most cities which are already war zones, in effect?

    Quote Originally Posted by Devil505 View Post
    How long do you think it would have taken Dillon & Clybolt (?) to kill any armed guards at Columbine?
    Should we post what would amount to private army units at every public school, shopping center, etc throughout the country?
    If the threat warrants such, then yes. What procedures do they use in Israel, as it would seem they have such a situation?
    If we start having multiple terrorist attacks in the US, I could easily see such a situation arising.
    Last edited by The Mark; 08-20-09 at 09:27 PM.
    Education.

    Sometimes I think we're alone. Sometimes I think we're not. In either case, the thought is staggering. ~ R. Buckminster Fuller

  4. #64
    Filmmaker Lawyer Patriot
    Harshaw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:45 AM
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    29,607

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Devil505 View Post
    So citizens should own nukes, aircraft carriers & tanks to even the playing field to fight our government's military?
    It always goes to this absurdity, doesn't it?

    You asked why the weapons an ordinary infantryman should carry should unrestricted. This is why.
    .

    So we have war zones in every city in the country?
    I'm pretty sure that's not what he said.


    How long do you think it would have taken Dillon & Clybolt (?) to kill any armed guards at Columbine?
    I don't know. How long? They were a couple of cowardly ****s, so they may not have even tried had they already been around.

    Strangely enough, the Swiss walk around with fully-auto rifles all the time, and none of this stuff is much of a problem.
    “Offing those rich pigs with their own forks and knives, and then eating a meal in the same room, far out! The Weathermen dig Charles Manson.”-- Bernadine Dohrn

  5. #65
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Masschusetts
    Last Seen
    03-01-14 @ 10:44 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    3,512

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Harshaw View Post
    It always goes to this absurdity, doesn't it?
    Not absurd at all. I was responding to the idea that citizens should be capable of defending themselves against our government. Our government has such weapons so a citizen would need the same one to make it more of a "Fair Fight"....Right?
    The absurd thing is the idea that citizens should have military type weapons to defend against our own military!
    .








    Quote Originally Posted by Harshaw View Post
    I don't know. How long? They were a couple of cowardly ****s, so they may not have even tried had they already been around.
    I'd say about 3 seconds & I doubt that these suicidal crazies would have been deterred by a 65 yr old ex-cop guard sitting at the door eating a donut!.
    Last edited by Devil505; 08-20-09 at 09:35 PM.

  6. #66
    Filmmaker Lawyer Patriot
    Harshaw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:45 AM
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    29,607

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Devil505 View Post
    The absurd thing is the idea that citizens should have military type weapons to defend against our own military!
    That IS one of the purposes of the 2A.




    I'd say about 3 seconds & I doubt that these suicidal crazies would have been deterred by a 65 yr old ex-cop guard sitting at the door eating a donut!.
    If that's what you say, then that's what you say.
    “Offing those rich pigs with their own forks and knives, and then eating a meal in the same room, far out! The Weathermen dig Charles Manson.”-- Bernadine Dohrn

  7. #67
    Professor
    Baralis's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    MO
    Last Seen
    12-05-17 @ 03:53 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    2,394
    Blog Entries
    1

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

    Quote Originally Posted by repeter View Post
    Does unregulated means whoever wants to buy a gun can buy one instantly with cash? If so, then the people who voted "no regulations are acceptable" are complete and total idiots. All there is to it.
    I doubt that making it illegal for a criminal to buy a gun has a hell of alot of an effect. Any criminals that want a gun can get a gun. The main difference is they are now purchasing guns that have been stolen from law abiding citizens or smugglers.

  8. #68
    Sporadic insanity normal.


    The Mark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:25 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    19,754

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Devil505 View Post
    Not absurd at all. I was responding to the idea that citizens should be capable of defending themselves against our government. Our government has such weapons so a citizen would need the same one to make it more of a "Fair Fight"....Right?
    The absurd thing is the idea that citizens should have military type weapons to defend against our own military!
    Not necessarily. A infantry-portable SAM can take down a military aircraft, just as infantry-portable weapons can disable or destroy most other military vehicles. A nuke would damage both the land and the reputation of a country which used it on their own people, thus most likely preventing it's use.
    While you may have a point about the current unlikelihood of citizens having to defend against their own military, as all military members are currently volunteers, and thus might have friends in the citizenry, in future times this might not be the case, and my belief is that the 2nd amendment is to allow for the citizens to protect themselves against such, if it occurs.

    Quote Originally Posted by Devil505 View Post
    I'd say about 3 seconds & I doubt that these suicidal crazies would have been deterred by a 65 yr old ex-cop guard sitting at the door eating a donut!.
    Which is why there is, IMO, a potential for needing appropriate levels of security at schools, if such incidents continue.

    Although trained and armed teachers would also assist in this.
    Education.

    Sometimes I think we're alone. Sometimes I think we're not. In either case, the thought is staggering. ~ R. Buckminster Fuller

  9. #69
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Masschusetts
    Last Seen
    03-01-14 @ 10:44 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    3,512

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

    Quote Originally Posted by The Mark View Post
    Not necessarily. A infantry-portable SAM can take down a military aircraft, just as infantry-portable weapons can disable or destroy most other military vehicles. A nuke would damage both the land and the reputation of a country which used it on their own people, thus most likely preventing it's use.
    While you may have a point about the current unlikelihood of citizens having to defend against their own military, as all military members are currently volunteers, and thus might have friends in the citizenry, in future times this might not be the case, and my belief is that the 2nd amendment is to allow for the citizens to protect themselves against such, if it occurs.
    The idea that citizens should be able to fight our own military, (with it thousands of nukes, SLBM's & the like) is just a ridiculous argument, imo.



    Quote Originally Posted by The Mark View Post
    Which is why there is, IMO, a potential for needing appropriate levels of security at schools, if such incidents continue.

    Although trained and armed teachers would also assist in this.
    Ah.....So Beaver Cleaver's teacher (Miss Landers) should be wearing a bandoleer of 30cal ammo while toting an M-60 machine gun around the halls of her elementary school?

  10. #70
    Filmmaker Lawyer Patriot
    Harshaw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:45 AM
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    29,607

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Devil505 View Post
    The idea that citizens should be able to fight our own military, (with it thousands of nukes, SLBM's & the like) is just a ridiculous argument, imo.
    It is one of the reasons the 2A exists.

    Recall what a band of malcontents were able to do against our military of thousands of nukes, SLBMs, and the like, in Iraq, and what they're still doing there and in Afghanistan. Why, many prominent members of Congress not only declared that we couldn't win, but we had actually lost.



    Ah.....So Beaver Cleaver's teacher (Miss Landers) should be wearing a bandoleer of 30cal ammo while toting an M-60 machine gun around the halls of her elementary school?
    This is the kind of absurdity I'm talking about, too.
    “Offing those rich pigs with their own forks and knives, and then eating a meal in the same room, far out! The Weathermen dig Charles Manson.”-- Bernadine Dohrn

Page 7 of 69 FirstFirst ... 567891757 ... 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
  •