Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
IGotWorms

The Second Amendment ("right to bear arms")

The Second Amendment  

68 members have voted

  1. 1. The Second Amendment:

    • Provides an individual right to keep and bear arms
      53
    • Provides a right to keep and bear arms, but only in relation to militia activities
      15
  2. 2. I am:

    • Against gun control
      34
    • Pro gun control
      34


Recommended Posts

Oh, I think it has more to do with machismo and insecurity than anything.........but I suppose that could be it for some people.

 

Sometimes true, sometimes not... like most stereotypes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mephisto trying to bury us with words

 

Wait a minute, you DO get that the thread is about the 2nd Amendment to the U.S. Constitution as the basis for the right to bear arms, correct? WTF does burying us with after the fact one-off state policy have diddly jack shiit to do with the framer's original intent? I love the fact that one of your lead-offs is Alaska. Which wasn't even a STATE for another 200 years AFTER the 2A was drafted. :rolleyes:

 

Way to "bury" that argument. Hey - Chicago just banned Trans Fats, obviously James Madison was anti-trans fats. :thumbsup:

 

Jagoff.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sometimes true, sometimes not... like most stereotypes.

 

It's not a stereotype. Look at the research.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It's not a stereotype. Look at the research.

Like this tidbit.

 

If there's too many guns in America, why is it that where guns are more available to people and gun laws are less restrictive, violent crime is usually lower?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi, I'm an idiot...

 

Wiffletool... it completely scuttles the childlike arguments about muskets, nuclear bombs, rocket launchers... failure to understand the language or intent of the original framers of the US Constitution.

 

You were OWNED, but I knew well in advance that the likelihood of you stepping up and admitting so was nil.

 

Game over, you lost. Continue posting your mindless thoughts as you wish, it won't change reality.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Didn't the framers construct this particular section to allow the people to retain the ability to oppose the government by armed intervention if needed?

 

At the time the federal government was a joke, but they were all rather afraid of it gaining the kind of power of a monarchy or British parliament and by ensuring the people were armed they thought that the notion of an uprising would be sufficient to help keep power in check?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

*bumpus* on the heels of the Supreme Court's historic ruling. :unsure:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wait a minute, you DO get that the thread is about the 2nd Amendment to the U.S. Constitution as the basis for the right to bear arms, correct? WTF does burying us with after the fact one-off state policy have diddly jack shiit to do with the framer's original intent? I love the fact that one of your lead-offs is Alaska. Which wasn't even a STATE for another 200 years AFTER the 2A was drafted. :overhead:

 

Way to "bury" that argument.

 

Jagoff.

 

Maybe you should educate yourself on the 10th-Amendment to the US Constitution you focking retard. :overhead:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Are you in a militia? no? No guns for you!

 

1. a body of citizens enrolled for military service, and called out periodically for drill but serving full time only in emergencies.

2. a body of citizen soldiers as distinguished from professional soldiers.

3. all able-bodied males considered by law eligible for military service.

4. a body of citizens organized in a paramilitary group and typically regarding themselves as defenders of individual rights against the presumed interference of the federal government.

the SC is wise and should ban all firearms. the founding fathers never imagined a bloodbath like we have today. It's time to change.

 

so, let's say none of us have guns. then, the bad republicans go on a 30 year power reign and you and the dope smokers have had it and you're ready to lead the revolt to remove those in charge. how would you go about that exactly?

 

dear mr president, we really want to overthrow you now since we don't like how you're destroying this country. please send us out some guns so that we can form a militia to fulfill our 2nd amendment rights. thanks. gth

 

dear gth, thanks for the request. we'll go ahead and deny that one. suck it up and pay taxes.

 

so, in the event of needed militia, what do you think the framers had in mind as to how they would form a militia with guns? yes, that's right. the people would already have the guns and then assemble. get it? we get the guns for the militia from the people who are protected by the 2nd amendment to have those guns. the 2nd amendment protects the 1st. without the 2nd, you will lose the 1st.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Oh, I think it has more to do with machismo and insecurity than anything.........but I suppose that could be it for some people.

 

It's usually a cultural thing.

 

I grew up fishing and hunting in small town Oklahoma, so guns were, and still are a big part of my life culture.

 

If a person grows up in a big city in an upper class family, there is a great chance that person never touched a gun in their life, so I can see why they are so afraid of guns.

 

If a person grew up in a big city in a dirt poor neighborhood, where gangs and drugs are a huge part of their culture, more then likely they have one or more guns.

 

It's a cultural thing for people, not a macho thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yaknow, maybe - just maybe - now that for the first time since George Wallace a major party candidate has had an assassination attempt on his life not once but twice - & given that both times the perpetrators had access to AR/AK style variants - we can move the discussion from the fact that such rifles are not just public safety risks (crime, mass murders) but also a national security risk.

  • Haha 3
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, SaintsInDome2006 said:

Yaknow, maybe - just maybe - now that for the first time since George Wallace a major party candidate has had an assassination attempt on his life not once but twice - & given that both times the perpetrators had access to AR/AK style variants - we can move the discussion from the fact that such rifles are not just public safety risks (crime, mass murders) but also a national security risk.

We should restrict the right of anyone who votes Democrat or attends a Taylor Swift concert from owning a gun.  They clearly aren't responsible enough to do so.  Even when comitting "insurrection" conservatives respect the 2nd amendment enough to do it with sticks instead of guns.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, SaintsInDome2006 said:

Yaknow, maybe - just maybe - now that for the first time since George Wallace a major party candidate has had an assassination attempt on his life not once but twice - & given that both times the perpetrators had access to AR/AK style variants - we can move the discussion from the fact that such rifles are not just public safety risks (crime, mass murders) but also a national security risk.

You might want to read up on these "AR / AK style variants". 
You might just learn summfin. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, SaintsInDome2006 said:

Yaknow, maybe - just maybe - now that for the first time since George Wallace a major party candidate has had an assassination attempt on his life not once but twice - & given that both times the perpetrators had access to AR/AK style variants - we can move the discussion from the fact that such rifles are not just public safety risks (crime, mass murders) but also a national security risk.

Can you explain to me how my AR is more of a national security risk than my 30-06?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, lickin_starfish said:

Can you explain to me how my AR is more of a national security risk than my 30-06?

no, he cant

ps

the last president assassinated was done with a bolt action rifle

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, lickin_starfish said:

Can you explain to me how my AR is more of a national security risk than my 30-06?

It’s a fine question but IMO a better question is why not include the Mannlicher Carcano because that rifle has actually been used in an assassination attempt (a successful one at that. And it’s really appropriate because Oswald ordered that rifle via catalogue & not only is that still a thing the internet means rifles can be ordered even more easily & quickly.

You could also raise the Wallace, RFK & Teagan assassinations/attempts as IIRC those merely involved revolvers at close quarters.

But to answer your question IMO the reason is that the AR & AK were the actual weapons choose by Crooks & Routh. Surely they did that for tactical reasons. For instance Crooks IIRC got off 8 shots on Trump before he was shot down. In that time frame how many shots could you get off with your 30-06? TIA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, RaiderHaters Revenge said:

the last president assassinated was done with a bolt action rifl

I just made that point above.

I’ll also add, if you know the actual model Crooks & Routh used please post it. IIRC Crooks used a 5.56 but I don’t recall seeing the actual model. TIA. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, SaintsInDome2006 said:

I just made that point above.

I’ll also add, if you know the actual model Crooks & Routh used please post it. IIRC Crooks used a 5.56 but I don’t recall seeing the actual model. TIA. 

wasn't an AR

https://www.fbi.gov/news/press-releases/butler-investigation-photos

 

Routh had an AK47 according to reports

illegal in 50 states

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Strike said:

the 2nd amendment enough to do it with sticks instead of guns.

>>>A member of the Oath Keeperswho took an AR-15-to a Virginia hotel on the eve of the Jan. 6 riot described entering a room filled with a large stash of weapons in a seditious conspiracy trial Wednesday.

The Oath Keepers member, Terry Cummings, testified that "a lot of firearms cases" were in the hotel room when he dropped off his weapon at a Comfort Inn in Arlington, Virginia, on Jan. 5, 2021.

“I had not seen that many weapons in one location since I was in the military,” Cummings said.<<< 

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/rcna51749

- Actually you raise another good point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, SaintsInDome2006 said:

>>>A member of the Oath Keeperswho took an AR-15-to a Virginia hotel on the eve of the Jan. 6 riot described entering a room filled with a large stash of weapons in a seditious conspiracy trial Wednesday.

The Oath Keepers member, Terry Cummings, testified that "a lot of firearms cases" were in the hotel room when he dropped off his weapon at a Comfort Inn in Arlington, Virginia, on Jan. 5, 2021.

“I had not seen that many weapons in one location since I was in the military,” Cummings said.<<< 

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/rcna51749

- Actually you raise another good point.

 

a large stash of firearms, isnt illegal

maybe everyone brought their firearms and they used that room to keep them while they went to the capitol without them

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, SaintsInDome2006 said:

Thanks. How about Crooks, do we know what actual make/model he used? TIA.

 

Crooks is in the link bro

  • Make: DPMS - Panther Arms
  • Model: A-15
  • Caliber: 5.56x45mm/.223 Remington Semiautomatic
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, SaintsInDome2006 said:

...Oswald ordered that rifle via catalogue & not only is that still a thing the internet means rifles can be ordered even more easily & quickly.

This is how we know you're just an anti2A tittybaby. You don't even know how guns are ordered online. Why didn't you go back to Wikipedia and do some more research.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, lickin_starfish said:

You don't even know how guns are ordered online.

I’m not arguing about how guns are ordered online. I’m talking about the actual guns used in 2 attempts to assassinate a presidential candidate. IIRC Crooks got his gun from his father. Routh, who appears to be a lunatic & had multiple conversations, apparently was using a gun banned from sale in the US altogether, how did he get it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Easy one to answer, those that hired him, supplied him with the weapon.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, SaintsInDome2006 said:

I’m not arguing about how guns are ordered online. I’m talking about the actual guns used in 2 attempts to assassinate a presidential candidate. IIRC Crooks got his gun from his father. Routh, who appears to be a lunatic & had multiple conversations, apparently was using a gun banned from sale in the US altogether, how did he get it?

It probably came across our wide open border.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, SaintsInDome2006 said:

It's ok if you don't know. Take care. Thanks for the responses.

You don't know either. You're just mad that you can't defend Emhoff 's wide open border policy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, lickin_starfish said:

You don't know either. You're just mad that you can't defend Emhoff 's wide open border policy.

I wouldn't try, I'm in favor of enforcing the INA. It still doesn't affect what we know about how Routh got the gun. We know the serial number is removed, that leaves open a lot of possibilities.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

In general, the SKS is an excellent all-around weapon that offers a slightly longer range and better accuracy than the Kalashnikov AK-47, but, for military use, it lacks the magazine capacity and selective-fire capabilities. The weapon was in service with several armed forces, both regular and irregular, and it can be found in many countries in Asia and Africa.

I have to say this is not the weapon I was expecting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, RaiderHaters Revenge said:

Routh had an AK47 according to reports

illegal in 50 states

>>>Models with semi-automatic settings are available and legal in the U.S. Manufacturers cannot make or import fully automatic weapons for the civilian market.

But you can still legally buy a fully automatic AK-47. Because this is America.

Any automatic weapon fully registered before May 1986, with the passage of the Firearm Owners Protection Act, can be purchased or sold. This means there is a market of an estimated 175,000 legal automatic weapons in the United States. The limited legal supply also means that one of these rifles can be wildly expensive -- not to mention the stiff Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives oversight and a $200 excise tax.

But if you can afford $10,000 for a legally automatic AK-47, $200 is likely not going to bother you.<<<

https://www.military.com/off-duty/ak-47-all-about.html?amp

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, SaintsInDome2006 said:

>>>Models with semi-automatic settings are available and legal in the U.S. Manufacturers cannot make or import fully automatic weapons for the civilian market.

But you can still legally buy a fully automatic AK-47. Because this is America.

Any automatic weapon fully registered before May 1986, with the passage of the Firearm Owners Protection Act, can be purchased or sold. This means there is a market of an estimated 175,000 legal automatic weapons in the United States. The limited legal supply also means that one of these rifles can be wildly expensive -- not to mention the stiff Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives oversight and a $200 excise tax.

But if you can afford $10,000 for a legally automatic AK-47, $200 is likely not going to bother you.<<<

https://www.military.com/off-duty/ak-47-all-about.html?amp

true, however, this has zero relevance on this event

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, RaiderHaters Revenge said:

true, however, this has zero relevance on this event

Unjust thought you might be interested. & it has some relevance as IIRC Routh used an SKS. The question is how did he get it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, SaintsInDome2006 said:

Unjust thought you might be interested. & it has some relevance as IIRC Routh used an SKS. The question is how did he get it.

oh yah, gotcha, I enjoy the conversations with you.  I knew about the pre 1986 machine gun laws, but I don't think its EVER come into play, those are pretty much exclusively collectors

 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×