• 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!

Do you think the second amendment needs amended?

Do you think the second amendment needs amended?

  • Yes

    Votes: 12 18.2%

  • No

    Votes: 53 80.3%

  • Not sure

    Votes: 1 1.5%
  • Total voters
    66
  • Poll closed .
NIMBY said:
You folks will always move the goalposts over the Grand Canyon no matter what the other side gives.
We call you GOPs the "false-equivalency" party after its originator Eric Cantor.

You simply want to make up your own rules as you go.
I'll stick with my common sense thread supporting Texas with concealed carry in schools--as an example of who I am .
Click to expand...

Would you care to address my concerns?
 
TurtleDude and I could sit down and hash this 2nd amendment out at one of his high-lifer clubs at the local level.
Just as you and I could hash out Paul Ryan's tax plan so you'd quit whining about the 16th amendment. :mrgreen:

It will happen some day at the local level--called Sen. Coburn's Constitutional Convention--
which you know I've been pusing for the 4.5 years you've known me .

AlabamaPaul said:
It might help... :mrgreen:
Click to expand...
 
countryboy said:
Again, this will only affect law abiding citizens. The criminals are like, you know, criminals and stuff. Duh.
Click to expand...

You're not getting it. The guys who shoot multiple people; ya'know - the ones we're talking about - were, up until those points law abiding citizens right?

Again: this isn;t rocket science. The OP asked for an opinion and I gave one. I dont know why the "law abiding citizen" argument; weak as it is, has to dragged into an opinion.

So, let me ask you this: do you think that it is possible; by that I mean, could it be done with enough states behind it; to alter the 2nd amendment? I know about "infinged", but with enough people behind it, it is probable that th 2nd could be - adjusted...

I think that's a much more interesting discussion.
 
NIMBY said:
How do you know?
I certainly don't have to justify my credentials on any amendment to you .
Click to expand...

My apologies, there was to be a question mark. I edited the post to fix that.
 
countryboy said:
You don't support the 2nd amendment at all, let alone a "strong supporter". Who do you think you're fooling?
Click to expand...

Oh I do. I just worry about it.
 
jet57 said:
You're not getting it. The guys who shoot multiple people; ya'know - the ones we're talking about - were, up until those points law abiding citizens right?

Again: this isn;t rocket science. The OP asked for an opinion and I gave one. I dont know why the "law abiding citizen" argument; weak as it is, has to dragged into an opinion.

So, let me ask you this: do you think that it is possible; by that I mean, could it be done with enough states behind it; to alter the 2nd amendment? I know about "infinged", but with enough people behind it, it is probable that th 2nd could be - adjusted...

I think that's a much more interesting discussion.
Click to expand...

In today's environment, if the courts can't "git er done", nothing will get done because of the divisiveness that currently exists. Can you imagine 3/4 of the country agreeing on any issue?
 
TurtleDude said:
more stupidity in that post. if civilians cops have a firearm-so should other civilians
Click to expand...

I'd be careful with the stupidity remark; your posts have yet to prove anything...

As for cops: we had that discussion already: you lost.
 
I'm one of those people who gets torched by both sides of the gun debate--just like abortion.
Each side stands on their own goal line and won't budge an inch towards the 50.
From my perspective, unless the GOP gunners tackle you for a safety, they don't win .

Montecresto said:
My apologies, there was to be a question mark. I edited the post to fix that.
Click to expand...
 
AlabamaPaul said:
Actually 80 would not be an exaggeration with a different means, and the people should have access to the same types of handheld weapons as might be used against us...
Click to expand...


So, who is supposed to be against us with such weapons? The cops? That happened with the Thompson; remember Al Capone and those guys?
 
But you tapped on my post first that did deal with Open Carry--supported by most of the gun jocks on DP.
Out here in Nevada right now, cabbies get to pick up drunk patrons who are open-carrying--sounds safe huh ?

AlabamaPaul said:
My post had no relation to open carry...
Click to expand...
 
jet57 said:
I'd be careful with the stupidity remark; your posts have yet to prove anything...

As for cops: we had that discussion already: you lost.
Click to expand...

no I didn't. You merely proclaim you win all the time while everyone else finds your posts vacant, silly, and unsupported by either logic or facts. You think whining about a few stupid people with guns proves that "concealed carry" is bad. You proffered no argument about cops other than basically saying we need to ban stuff so bad guys won't get it--you weren't able to understand that makes you a gun banner
 
NIMBY said:
I'm one of those people who gets torched by both sides of the gun debate--just like abortion.
Each side stands on their own goal line and won't budge an inch towards the 50.
From my perspective, unless the GOP gunners tackle you for a safety, they don't win .
Click to expand...

What is your position on the second amendment then. You seemed to separate yourself from those that hold the second amendment as they do the first and fourth.
 
jet57 said:
So, who is supposed to be against us with such weapons? The cops? That happened with the Thompson; remember Al Capone and those guys?
Click to expand...

I'm not quite old enough to remember Capone (close), but it doesn't change the fact that the victims of crime are better able to deter it by being equally or better armed...
 
jet57 said:
So, who is supposed to be against us with such weapons? The cops? That happened with the Thompson; remember Al Capone and those guys?
Click to expand...

there is but one case of anyone being killed with a legally owned automatic weapon in 70 years-and that was someone a DAYTON OHIO police officer murdered
 
Montecresto said:
Apparently you didn't read the thread and follow along. What I presented is an argument that has been made by some. But the end of my post, that you quoted, explains my position!
Click to expand...

Ah, sorry 'bout that. I get a little defensive about the 2nd Amendment, and I'm still new here. :)
 
NIMBY said:
But you tapped on my post first that did deal with Open Carry--supported by most of the gun jocks on DP.
Out here in Nevada right now, cabbies get to pick up drunk patrons who are open-carrying--sounds safe huh ?
Click to expand...

I would think that the law abiding, responsible Americans that we hold up when criticizing any amount of regulation, who happen to have CHL's, would leave their weapon at home when they are going out to get drunk.
 
AlabamaPaul said:
In today's environment, if the courts can't "git er done", nothing will get done because of the divisiveness that currently exists. Can you imagine 3/4 of the country agreeing on any issue?
Click to expand...

The courts would not rule on the issue: congress would. Hey, I think it's a probability the way things are going, and as the older generation dies off, and if some serious attention isnt paid to this trend , (how many big shootings have we had recently?), as the next two generations begin to separate themselves from the tradition of the 2nd Amendment, that possibility is going to move toward a probability.
 
TurtleDude said:
no I didn't. You merely proclaim you win all the time while everyone else finds your posts vacant, silly, and unsupported by either logic or facts. You think whining about a few stupid people with guns proves that "concealed carry" is bad. You proffered no argument about cops other than basically saying we need to ban stuff so bad guys won't get it--you weren't able to understand that makes you a gun banner
Click to expand...

I'm not playin' you game dude. I'm not arguing old material in a new thread.
 
jet57 said:
Oh I do. I just worry about it.
Click to expand...

jet57 said:
You're not getting it. The guys who shoot multiple people; ya'know - the ones we're talking about - were, up until those points law abiding citizens right?

Again: this isn;t rocket science. The OP asked for an opinion and I gave one. I dont know why the "law abiding citizen" argument; weak as it is, has to dragged into an opinion.

So, let me ask you this: do you think that it is possible; by that I mean, could it be done with enough states behind it; to alter the 2nd amendment? I know about "infinged", but with enough people behind it, it is probable that th 2nd could be - adjusted...

I think that's a much more interesting discussion.
Click to expand...

Yeah, not so much.
 
jet57 said:
The courts would not rule on the issue: congress would. Hey, I think it's a probability the way things are going, and as the older generation dies off, and if some serious attention isnt paid to this trend , (how many big shootings have we had recently?), as the next two generations begin to separate themselves from the tradition of the 2nd Amendment, that possibility is going to move toward a probability.
Click to expand...

that's why we gun owners spend so much time teaching kids the fun and importance of shooting

I also teach them to never ever trust gun banners.
 
jet57 said:
The courts would not rule on the issue: congress would. Hey, I think it's a probability the way things are going, and as the older generation dies off, and if some serious attention isnt paid to this trend , (how many big shootings have we had recently?), as the next two generations begin to separate themselves from the tradition of the 2nd Amendment, that possibility is going to move toward a probability.
Click to expand...

You missed the point. The courts are now used to shape society in lieu of the Constitutional process. It's a lot easier to get a few to agree as opposed to a vast majority...
 
AlabamaPaul said:
I'm not quite old enough to remember Capone (close), but it doesn't change the fact that the victims of crime are better able to deter it by being equally or better armed...
Click to expand...

If a certain weapon, is restricted from the public, how then is a criminal going to get it? Said weapons are traceable to their destination.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom