Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 6
Karlis

The Global Gun Control Threat

326 posts in this topic

The 2nd amendment says nothing about hunting or a hunting culture. It's about protecting freedom.

You need a semi-auto AK-47 or AR-15 with a 100-round box mag to go hunting...? :huh:

Cz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You need a semi-auto AK-47 or AR-15 with a 100-round box mag to go hunting...? :huh:

Cz

Its the part like so many people have spoken here Like "BR" gun control LOL The way to control it is to Stop makeing Automatic assault waepons,and letting them onto the Streets. The public has no need what so ever for these in there bloody hands ! Get Some Balls America ! Stop this Insanity ! We will all be better off without them ! :gun::no:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Czero 101 People that want to limit guns always bring up "not needing such guns for hunting" ( see Bill Clinton quote above).

The 2nd amendment has nothing to do with that argument.

The 2nd amendment is about freedom.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's a true leader the unlimited guns folks can really get behind! It's time to choose sides, and CEO James Yeager is YOUR man to represent real American values...

http://www.huffingto..._n_2448751.html

Or not...

Edited by hacktorp

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah! great clip to prove your point. All gun owners are like that guy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah! great clip to prove your point. All gun owners are like that guy.

All gun manufacturers and their pimps are LOVING that guy. Ain't freedom great?

Edited by hacktorp

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Most Gun owners are like James Yeager ! Nuff said ! :tu:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Most Gun owners are like James Yeager ! Nuff said ! :tu:

And here I wuz thinkin' everbody frum Texas wuz gun toten, Bible thumpin' idjuts. :P

Edited by Michelle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I feel this belong's in this thread as well:

Hardy, p. 1237. "Early Americans wrote of the right in light of three considerations: (1) as auxiliary to a natural right of self-defense; (2) as enabling an armed people to deter undemocratic government; and (3) as enabling the people to organize a militia system."

Malcolm, "That Every Man Be Armed," pp. 452, 466. "The Second Amendment reflects traditional English attitudes toward these three distinct, but intertwined, issues: the right of the individual to protect his life, the challenge to government of an armed citizenry, and the preference for a militia over a standing army. The framers' attempt to address all three in a single declarative sentence has contributed mightily to the subsequent confusion over the proper interpretation of the Second Amendment."

Merkel and Uviller, pp. 62, 179 ff, 183, 188 ff, 306. "[T]he right to bear arms was articulated as a civic right inextricably linked to the civic obligation to bear arms for the public defense."

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Czero 101 People that want to limit guns always bring up "not needing such guns for hunting" ( see Bill Clinton quote above).

The 2nd amendment has nothing to do with that argument.

The 2nd amendment is about freedom.

Fair point... Apparently I misread the intent of your post.

Doesn't change my position or the position of many others that this whole debate is not about taking away people's right to own weapons, that military-grade weaponry should not be as easily available - if at all - to the general populace as it currently is, and that the 2nd as written over 200 years ago is out of date and needs to be addressed to be brought up to date with the current state and definitions of modern arms and armaments.

Cz

Edited by Czero 101

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Doesn't change my position or the position of many others that this whole debate is not about taking away people's right to own weapons, that military-grade weaponry should not be as easily available - if at all - to the general populace as it currently is, and that the 2nd as written over 200 years ago is out of date and needs to be addressed to be brought up to date with the current state and definitions of modern arms and armaments.

If thats how you want things to work in Canada fine but dont push that agenda in America.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If thats how you want things to work in Canada fine but dont push that agenda in America.

Since when is having and voicing an opinion "pushing an agenda"...?

And I didn't know I had to be American to be disgusted by concerned over the number of dead Americans due to mostly preventable gun violence.

Cz

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Im only suggesting you worry about Canada atm. America has enough crap going on internally. We need to work it out. Your opinion is valued.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I say" OVER THEIR DEAD BODIES"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Second Amendment (Amendment II) to the United States Constitution is the part of the United States Bill of Rights that protects the right of the people to keep and bear arms

And here is an oath of enlisted and officers sworn to protect and defend the constitution of which the second amendment is part of. This is also along the lines

of politcal parties oaths including the Presidents.

"I, _____, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God." (Title 10, US Code; Act of 5 May 1960 replacing the wording first adopted in 1789, with amendment effective 5 October 1962).

"I, _____ (SSAN), having been appointed an officer in the Army of the United States, as indicated above in the grade of _____ do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic, that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office upon which I am about to enter; So help me God." (DA Form 71, 1 August 1959, for officers.)

So when they try and take away the second amendment, this is why we have arms. Our own government has become the enemy.

Edited by Realm
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So have people actually looked through the thread and looked at the source material to see that no one is seriously moving to take away the Second Amendment? It's rather odd to see people fighting against something that's not happening.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What the hell are you talking about Corp ? Detentions have begun in a small scale of American citizens.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sure they have. :rolleyes: Do you have any non-bias sources that state that Americans are being rounded up for no reason at all?

The Second Amendment is not going anywhere. Even if gun control laws are put into place you will still have plenty of guns. Claimly otherwise is just not factual and does nothing but spread fear and paranoia.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gun Control Laws is attacking the 2nd Amendment ...Talking about it angers gun advocates.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The 2nd Amendment says you can have guns. No where does it say what type of guns. So unless a law comes up to ban 100% of all firearms then gun control laws do not attack the 2nd Amendment. And if having an adult conversation makes them angry then gun advocates need to grow a thicker skin.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How many gun casualties does Australia have anymore?

On a per person per year basis, about one tenth of the USA number.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The 2nd Amendment says you can have guns. No where does it say what type of guns. So unless a law comes up to ban 100% of all firearms then gun control laws do not attack the 2nd Amendment. And if having an adult conversation makes them angry then gun advocates need to grow a thicker skin.

Not many object to the adult conversation.

But keep in mind that an adult conversation, which would include a rational analysis of the empirical data, reveals that in terms of stopping people from shooting each other, what is generally considered "gun control laws" are grossly ineffective.

Yes, they might make everybody feel better, and make it look like government is "doing something", but their efficacy is notoriously nonexistent.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the 2nd amendment "arms" in the 18th century were flint locks. I'm not opposed to as many people having as many flint locks as they want. And that's all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the 2nd amendment "arms" in the 18th century were flint locks. I'm not opposed to as many people having as many flint locks as they want. And that's all.

It's garbage thinking of people like yours that need to go somewhere, make yourself a town, and let everyone who wants it that way live there. Leave us law abiding gun owners alone. We're sick of idiots trying to take away our rights.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's garbage thinking of people like yours that need to go somewhere, make yourself a town, and let everyone who wants it that way live there. Leave us law abiding gun owners alone. We're sick of idiots trying to take away our rights.

What part of "This isn't about taking away your right to own a gun, this is about limiting the availability of military-grade weaponry from people who do not need to own them" are you being too obstinate to understand...?

Cz

1 person likes this

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  
Followers 6

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.