• 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?


  • Total voters
    70
The idea that anyone can buy a gun, anytime is a sad, sad prospect. For example, if someone hates you, and is a in a mental institute, he can get a gun, shoot and kill you, and he'll just go back to the crazy place. That concept, that anyone, including crazies and convicts can buy guns is a horrid concept. That is what you people want when you say no regulation. You'll only care about that when a convict shoots up a bus of people with an M-16, and one of your family members is dead.

Oh wow...I'm like, so scared.
 
The 2nd discusses both a Colective and an Individual Right to bear Arms... Some regulation/control is needed.

There is no such thing as a collective right. Only individuals possess rights.
 
not real??

Here are 3 incidences (2 involving cops having their gun taken away) that a 5 minute google search found.
Fbi would have statistics but it is not rare at all. (one of the agents in my group was shot in the hand with his own gun while struggling with someone)



new orleans cop shot to death with her own gun - cnn.com

florida cop shot with own gun in drug bust: Top news stories at officer.com

police: Man shot with own gun during attempted robbery - pittsburgh news story - wtae pittsburgh

three!? Omfg!!! Whoa!!! Three!!!
 
In what terms? I mean this debate has always sorta spun out to some level of absurdity. If we're merely talking firearms, such as hand guns, assault rifles, fully automatics, etc; then no I don't think there can be proper regulation on it and still be constitutional. But we can always take things to extremes, what about nuclear weapons, biological, etc. At some point when we go into machinery and weaponry there becomes a point in which everyone says "ok, the People cannot be allowed to have X".

In terms of firearms, I don't even like background checks...I can grudgingly put up with them if they are instantaneous. I don't believe in waiting periods, permits, or anything else which infringes upon the right of the individual to keep and bear arms and which attempts to turn the right into a privilege.

I'm with you everywhere except the background checks. I think that an instant background check should be required of everyone purchasing a firearm. I think that firearms are no longer a right for someone who has used one in the commission of a crime and that a background check that comes back dirty in that regard only should bar them from the purchase.
 
Maybe cops should not have gun? :shrug: :lol:

Yea, that's a good point.

WHAT IF a crazy guy takes their gun and starts shooting everyone!?

WHAT IF a Russian Commando on vacation disarms the officer, holds him hostage, breaks into a police station, obtains MORE firearms from the armoury and proceeds to go on a rampage!?

WHAT IF...
 
You know, cops shoot a lot more people than civilians. You may be on to something ...




And to think they suck for the most part at hitting thier target.... ;)


Safest place to stand when a cop is shooting at you? Right in front of them.
 
three!? Omfg!!! Whoa!!! Three!!!

Just to be fair, 3 links does not mean 3 incidences. You are not arguing against his point, just ridiculing him to avoid the actual point.
 
Just to be fair, 3 links does not mean 3 incidences. You are not arguing against his point, just ridiculing him to avoid the actual point.

Okay, then what is his point?
 
three!? Omfg!!! Whoa!!! Three!!!

I was referring to this post

Seriously. Seriously. Everyone keeps using this argument as a reason that people can't use their own guns in self defense, but I have never heard of a single case where an armed citizen has been disarmed by their own assailant. The idea of it staggers the imagination.

That's the realm of Lifetime made for TV movies, not real life.

Where the poster said "I have never heard of a single case where an armed citizen has been disarmed by their own assailant. "

& since a cop is certainly a citizen of this country, armed & presumably more difficult to disarm than Miss Landers,......I quickly found a few links to disprove his point. I could find many more links &.......So could you.;)
 
Last edited:
I'm with you everywhere except the background checks. I think that an instant background check should be required of everyone purchasing a firearm. I think that firearms are no longer a right for someone who has used one in the commission of a crime and that a background check that comes back dirty in that regard only should bar them from the purchase.

I can understand that. As I said, instant background checks are something I would grudgingly accept. But I don't like registration or permits or anything else like that.
 
I can understand that. As I said, instant background checks are something I would grudgingly accept. But I don't like registration or permits or anything else like that.

Not being mean, but the I would love the irony of you getting shot and killed because there wasn't enough regulations. Same goes for everyone else wanting no regulations for gun ownership.
 
Not being mean, but the I would love the irony of you getting shot and killed because there wasn't enough regulations. Same goes for everyone else wanting no regulations for gun ownership.

So be it. If I got shot and killed, well there's probability of that. Not high, more likely to be taken out by a car while in the crosswalk...especially in my town. But whatever. What I wouldn't want is my death being used as means to enact more gun law. I will live by freedom and die by freedom if necessary. If I die free, well there are well worse conditions to die under. I would much rather die free than live enslaved.
 
Last edited:
Not being mean, but the I would love the irony of you getting shot and killed because there wasn't enough regulations. Same goes for everyone else wanting no regulations for gun ownership.

I always loved the NRA BS that says that requiring registration is the first step in the government's plan to come & take our guns away.
By that thinking, requiring a marriage license must be the first step in the government's plan to come & take....... our WIVES AWAY!!! :eek:


(hmm...on 2nd thought......Just kidding!!):lol:
 
I always loved the NRA BS that says that requiring registration is the first step in the government's plan to come & take our guns away.
By that thinking, requiring a marriage license must be the first step in the government's plan to come & take....... our WIVES AWAY!!! :eek:


(hmm...on 2nd thought......Just kidding!!):lol:

Specifically on the marriage license, that was created initially to ban inter-racial marriage. It went to the SCOTUS which found that you couldn't require the marriage license of specific couples, and that's when it got expanded past inter-racial couples to everyone. The marriage license is not necessary, but the government took that power and once government usurps power it's damned hard to get it back again.
 
I'm iffy about it. I will confess having a gun that isn't permitted or registered. I actually don't even know how to go about registering or permitting a gun that's been passed down in my family. Do I even have to register a really old hunting rifle? Or is it just handguns?

From Firearms Laws for California:

The waiting period and dealer application do not
apply to
transfers to police officers, other gun dealers,
manufacturers, or importers, antique firearms, and rifles
and shotguns which are classified as curios or relics by the
federal government, infrequent gifts or transfers to one’s
“immediate family,” an infrequent temporary loan not to
exceed 30 days to a person who is not prohibited from
possessing a firearm, and a transfer of a rifle or shotgun at
auctions by nonprofit or public benefit corporations.

ANTIQUES AND REPLICAS
Antique firearm means any firearm not designed or
redesigned for using rimfire or centerfire ammunition and
manufactured in or before 1898
(including any matchlock,
flintlock, percussion cap or similar type of ignition system
or replica thereof, whether actually manufactured before
1898) and also any firearm manufactured in or before 1898
using fixed ammunition which is no longer manufactured
in the U.S. and is not readily available in the ordinary
channels of commercial trade.
 
Not being mean, but the I would love the irony of you getting shot and killed because there wasn't enough regulations. Same goes for everyone else wanting no regulations for gun ownership.
Yeah, that was uncalled for. Way to rise above the crassness, pal. :roll:
 
I always loved the NRA BS that says that requiring registration is the first step in the government's plan to come & take our guns away.
By that thinking, requiring a marriage license must be the first step in the government's plan to come & take....... our WIVES AWAY!!! :eek:


(hmm...on 2nd thought......Just kidding!!):lol:

You don't follow history much, do you?
 
Not being mean, but the I would love the irony of you getting shot and killed because there wasn't enough regulations. Same goes for everyone else wanting no regulations for gun ownership.

Preceding a statement with "not being mean but..." does not in any way mitigate the total lack of class and maturity of what followed it.
 
I was referring to this post



Where the poster said "I have never heard of a single case where an armed citizen has been disarmed by their own assailant. "

& since a cop is certainly a citizen of this country, armed & presumably more difficult to disarm than Miss Landers,......I quickly found a few links to disprove his point. I could find many more links &.......So could you.;)

Okay, so you've proven that at least two police officers in the history of America have been disarmed, so what? Besides rebutting Kor, what is your point? Is this meaningless aberration supposed to prove a trend of some sort? I mean, according to your logic we should disarm the police officers, too, since the risk of their being disarmed is so much greater than a teacher's.

Oh, and unless you plan on showing me some actual data pertaining to the disarmament rate of police officers, don't bother with the red herring of telling me to search Google. If the disarming of police officers is reason enough to keep competent teachers from possessing a firearm then there should be some significant data to support that.
 
& since a cop is certainly a citizen of this country, armed & presumably more difficult to disarm than Miss Landers,......

Another point. Only in your non-thinking world would "Miss Landers" get a gun. Why not give one to Coach Kooi, my old trigonometry teacher? I'd like to see you take his gun...:lol:
 
Back
Top Bottom