• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Should There Be Any Regulations To 2nd Amnendment Rights?

Are ANY government regulations of the 2nd Amendment acceptable?

  • No. It's a Constitutional Right & no regulatioins are acceptable.

    Votes: 25 35.7%

  • Yes. Reasonable regulations are acceptable.

    Votes: 36 51.4%

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

    Votes: 16 22.9%

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

    Votes: 7 10.0%

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

    Votes: 1 1.4%

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

    Votes: 12 17.1%
  • Total voters
    70
Devil505 said:
There are at least 25 people on this forum who believe that. Ask them.
Click to expand...
I'll ask you...
Can you provise a list of people who advocate no regulation for gun ownership?
 
Goobieman said:
Did you? Guessing not...
7.62x51 is not .30 cal.
.30 cal is .30-06.
Click to expand...

Technically speaking any 7.62mm regardless of casing is .30Cal. Even a Russian 7.62x39 is a .30Cal weapon.

7.62x51 is a .308 which is exactly the same caliber as a .30.06.

So he is correct an M-60 used .308 ammo which is .30Cal in bore. Not to be confused with the actual .30Cal round which has the same bore and a different casing.
 
Last edited:
Devil505 said:
Well that's good then since.....None of us take you seriously either!:lol:

(just kidding......To wide an opening there for me to drive around it)
Click to expand...

True, true.

One of the things I excell at is leaving massive openings for people to jump into with jokes at my expense.
 
Devil505 said:
I was pointing out 7.62 .......the standard NATO round.
Click to expand...
Which is not .30 cal, the round in the belts around your hypothetical teacher's neck. As I said, it is useless in the M60.
 
Goobieman said:
In the same manner as 1st amendment rights are regulated, yes.

However, the poll choices you offer indicate you have no understanding of how this concept would apply.
Click to expand...
I wonder when D505 will respond to this post...
 
Goobieman said:
My exercise of my 2nd amendment rights do not endanger you, and so you have nothing to protect yourself from.
Click to expand...
I wonder when D505 will respond to this post...
 
Goobieman said:
You can not want me to own them all you want -- if they fall under the definition of "arms" as it is used in the amendment, your desire is trumped by the constitution, and carries no more weight than someone not wanting you to express your political opinion by burning the flag.
Click to expand...
I wonder when D505 will respond to this post...
 
Blackdog said:
Technically speaking any 7.62mm regardless of casing is .30Cal. Even a Russian 7.62x39 is a .30Cal weapon.
7.62x51 is a .308 which is exactly the same caliber as a .30.06.
Click to expand...
The confusion here is the non-interchangability of the terms "caliber" and "round".

.30cal is a "round", as in 7.62x63 or .30-06.
7.62mm bullet size is a "caliber", as in "a bullet with a 7.62mm diameter".

And, just to note, while 7.62x39 is nominally a 7.62mm round, the bullets are actually .311" diameter, same as in the UK's .303 and Japan's 7.7mm weapons.
 
Goobieman said:
The confusion here is the non-interchangability of the terms "caliber" and "round".

.30cal is a "round", as in 7.62x63 or .30-06.
7.62mm bullet size is a "caliber", as in "a bullet with a 7.62mm diameter".

And, just to note, while 7.62x39 is nominally a 7.62mm round, the bullets are actually .311" diameter, same as in the UK's .303 and Japan's 7.7mm weapons.
Click to expand...

.30 cal is an actual round but any round in .30Cal is also considered a .30Cal round.

7.62x39
7.62x51
7.62x54r
7.62x63

are all .30Cal rounds.

So his usage of the term .30Cal for an M-60 is absolutly correct as the M-60 uses a .308 which is a .30Cal round. Even the Army calls it a .30 Cal round.

I don't know why you even mentioned the use of the term round as it did not apply to anything you are Devil505 said.

This site has the details...

Nammo AS - 7.62mm (.30 Cal)

None of this has anything to do with his ridicules responses about gun rights, but technically as I said he was correct on the ammo type and weapon.
 
Last edited:
Goobieman said:
I'll ask you...
Can you provise a list of people who advocate no regulation for gun ownership?
Click to expand...
I was hoping to hear a reply to this question as well.
 
Goobieman said:
:doh
10 characters
Click to expand...

And what is that supposed to mean? I am correct whether you ignore my information or not.

I know my weapons and ammo.
 
Re: Should There Be Any Regulations To 2nd Amendment Rights?

That 40% embrace the Constitution so and believe that no gun restrictions are necessary - this is scary..
Either these people are obtuse or they really hold this to be dear..
I'd say that in a modern society, the guns are not necessary.
But do we have a "modern" society ?
The people at the "town hall" meetings say NO.
 
Re: Should There Be Any Regulations To 2nd Amendment Rights?

earthworm said:
That 40% embrace the Constitution so and believe that no gun restrictions are necessary - this is scary.
Click to expand...
I dont see that poll option.
I see where it offers:
It's a Constitutional Right & no regulatioins are acceptable.

Either these people are obtuse or they really hold this to be dear.
Click to expand...
How are they obtuse?

I'd say that in a modern society, the guns are not necessary.
Click to expand...
This, your opinion, has no meaning whatesoever.

But do we have a "modern" society ?
The people at the "town hall" meetings say NO.
Click to expand...
How does that follow?
 
Re: Should There Be Any Regulations To 2nd Amendment Rights?

earthworm said:
That 40% embrace the Constitution so and believe that no gun restrictions are necessary - this is scary..
Either these people are obtuse or they really hold this to be dear..
I'd say that in a modern society, the guns are not necessary.
But do we have a "modern" society ?
The people at the "town hall" meetings say NO.
Click to expand...

I'd say those 40% probably have a much better idea about what a right is and the importance to have it recognized than your lot.
 
Re: Should There Be Any Regulations To 2nd Amendment Rights?

Ikari said:
I'd say those 40% probably have a much better idea about what a right is and the importance to have it recognized than your lot.
Click to expand...

I don't doubt the realization of what a right is is lost on them.

I think it's more of a "I'm better than them" ideology.


Cause if the government were to try and limit their right to free speech... they'd be up in arms.. (not literally as most of them we know like to be victims)
 
Last edited:
Re: Should There Be Any Regulations To 2nd Amendment Rights?

stevenb said:
I don't doubt the realization of what a right is is lost on them.

I think it's more of a "I'm better than them" ideology.
Click to expand...

To me, the scary thing isn't the 40% who believe in upholding to the absolute the rights and liberties of the individual. It's when someone claims that a right is no longer needed in the "modern era". Well just what other rights aren't needed in the modern era? Speech? Press? Religion? Property? Searches? Privacy? Redress? Protest? I mean, once you open that flood gate of rights no longer being needed, where does it exactly end? Well I know where it ends, horrible Big Brother police state; but it makes me wonder if people actually consider the consequences of their actions.
 
Re: Should There Be Any Regulations To 2nd Amendment Rights?

stevenb said:
Cause if the government were to try and limit their right to free speech... they'd be up in arms.. (not literally as most of them we know like to be victims)
Click to expand...
As I noted before, and as the OP has refused to address, restrictions on and the degree of protection for the right to keep and bear arms should parallel those of those rights found under the 1st amendment.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom