Me Keep Gun, OK!
- Started
- Last post
- 52 Responses
- sikma0
I love the way the gun argument works.
Educated people explain provide meaning full facts, figures and examples of how guns harm the fabric of a society.
Rednecks recite the 2nd amendment like its somehow relevant in modern life.
Its a perfect cross section of the American public.
- flashbender0
If the 2nd amendment was relevant in today's society there should have been an armed rebellion about 5 years ago.
- or for sure 3.5 years agoflashbender
- bingosikma
- I think they meant protecting us from autocracy or invasion.Mimio
- Not while we citizens can't have tanks, helicopters and communication equipmentTheBlueOne
- Handgun vs. National Guard = you lose suckaTheBlueOne
- autocracy? oh no! oh, um, wait...flashbender
- TheBlueOne0
Oddly enough, although the usual trolls like to stick me somewhere left of Trotsky, I don't have too much problem with the Court's ruling today. I tend to hold every right in the Bill of Rights as sacrosanct. Although there is wiggle room about how to legislate some control over who has what kind of weapons, I do think the right to carry is a fundamental right (Just as the Supreme Court has rule din the past that Free Speech is a fundamental right, but that doesn't protect ALL speech - those that are held as obscene or inciting can fall outside the boundaries).
What I do have a problem with, as I stated before, is using one logical set of arguments to protect one amendment and then using the opposite logical thinking to limit another. If you're going to say the 2nd Amendment clearly protects the right to bear arms for the individual then how can you not logically use the same framework to insure that person's privacy cannot be infringed by the same government?
It's assinine.
- well said.mrdobolina
- Well said.ismith
- Fuckismith
- Said well.harlequino
- sikma0
Say for instance there was a small personal weapon that could kill anyone anywhere with a click of a button. Instant death from miles away. Should it be legal?
- Hypotheticals are awesome. The same way Scailia used "24" as an example to defend torture: http://thinkprogress…TheBlueOne
- true. they can work both ways.sikma
- slippery slopes and all that. indeed.TheBlueOne
- damn, that Scala guy is a clueless scumbagpr2
- designbot0
I think for most pro-gun people it just boils down to having the right....not necessarily even owning a gun. Just because you don't agree with something, doesn't mean someone else should have that right taken away. This is the whole reason the constitution was put in place, to protect everyone and keep the government in check. There are plenty of issues that I might not agree with, but I can respect peoples freedom/rights on...and therefore would not vote against them.
- Aye. I don't want a gun, own a gun, or ever plan to. But I think it's g-ddamn insane to fucking ban them.********
- exactly!designbot
- I wonder how many people are pro gun and anti gay marriage?Mimio
- A lot of people unfortunately.ismith
- I'm pro-gun and pro-gay marriage.TheBlueOne
- pro-gay? :Dmrdobolina
- Aye. I don't want a gun, own a gun, or ever plan to. But I think it's g-ddamn insane to fucking ban them.
- tasty0
- they better not take away my right to bare arms.tasty
- those guns are outta control.designbot
- ahhahahaamrdobolina
- hahahhahasea_sea
- 7point340
where's Llyod?
- moldero0
guns are banned down here in Mexico, but you always read about how the Cartel have more weapons than the military down here, which they do, a month back there was a gun battle a few miles from our house (all fully auto) the good guys ran out of rounds and retreated, the cartel gets arrested with RPG's amd handhelds with every bust. gun bans are useless, (unless your the bad guy) all the do is insure only the bad guy will be armed.
- Bad guys will ALWAYS be armed.TheBlueOne
- yupmoldero
- with bears7point34
- technikiller0
I believe the 2nd amendment has as much to do with protecting yourself from others as it does protecting yourself from your own government. The government should fear the people, not the other way around. Eradicating personal weapons was one of Hitlers primary concerns when attempting to overthrow a country. The Bush administration has already suspended habeas corpus for 'terrorist suspects', besides all the other wiretapping crap and the list goes on. Giving up liberty for a temporary feeling of safety is ridiculous.
And as far as 'permits' go, the vast majority of violent crimes in cities are committed with unregistered weapons anyway.
- sikma0
technikiller makes a strong point. i will happily eat my words. this issue is much more complicated then i thought
