Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
DiamondFlyer
Posts: 3576
Joined: Wed Oct 29, 2008 11:50 pm

RE: Yet Another US Shooting, 6 Dead.

Tue Apr 26, 2016 5:20 pm

Quoting RRTrent (Reply 149):
I do want to ask a question if you don't mind. Whats your position on a convicted criminal owning a gun? are his/her rights infringed because they are not allowed be in possession of a firearm?. Or on another level, can a 3 yr old child own a weapon as all US citizens have equal constitutional rights. So am I right in saying both children and criminals have a constitutional right to have an oozie stashed under their pillow?

What's an oozie?

Secondly, I have no problem with non-violent criminals who have done their time having their firearms rights restored, which some states have begun to do. Violent offenders absolutely have no reason to be given their rights back. Can a 3 year old child vote, no, and they can't own a gun either.

-DiamondFlyer
 
User avatar
RRTrent
Posts: 463
Joined: Sat Aug 29, 2015 8:12 am

RE: Yet Another US Shooting, 6 Dead.

Tue Apr 26, 2016 5:26 pm

Quoting DiamondFlyer (Reply 150):
Can a 3 year old child vote, no, and they can't own a gun either.

Fair point... I don't think constitutional rights apply to voters only, but I agree with your assertion that a 3 year old cant own a gun, cause that would be silly. You have also demonstrated that these rights that shall not be infringed, may actually be infringed when it suits, children and violent offenders. I agree with this infringement, and evidently you do too.

By the way, I'm not against gun ownership, its a right that US citizens are born with. I just think there are few too many faults at the minute, which I think is a reasonable taught.

An oozie is an Uzi, I spelt it wrong... although I'm sure you guessed that.

[Edited 2016-04-26 10:36:31]
 
Scorpio
Posts: 5055
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2001 3:48 am

RE: Yet Another US Shooting, 6 Dead.

Tue Apr 26, 2016 5:29 pm

Quoting lapa_saab340 (Reply 143):
The burglar will think twice about breaking into a home in an area where owners are known to be armed. If I'm Mr Burglar, I will break into Scorpio's house instead, who will be more than happy to let me take his personal belongings. Make sure you stock up on beer as I'm likely to be thirsty and will want a drink also.

If that were true, I'm sure we'd see considerably more burglaries in Western Europe than in the US, right?

Well, let's look at the numbers:
http://www.nationmaster.com/country-info/stats/Crime/Burglaries

So there goes that argument...

Quoting lapa_saab340 (Reply 144):
Please, can you be more ridiculous? Do you have a sixth sense that tells you what an intruder is doing breaking into your home? Or will you politely ask him? You have no idea if that person is armed, what they may be armed with, and what they are capable of. If you feel cowering into a corner and hoping for the best outcome is the answer, that's your choice. Other folks will elect to protect themselves and their loved ones if threatened. That does not mean shoot at the first thing that moves, as you're implying.

Could you possibly try to understand what I write before replying? Because I said the BURGLAR will be much more likely to shoot at the first thing that moves if there is a big chance the owner is armed.

And the same question to you that I asked someone else earlier, but didn't get a reply to: are your car and TV worth risking your life and that of your family for?
 
User avatar
scbriml
Posts: 20311
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2003 10:37 pm

RE: Yet Another US Shooting, 6 Dead.

Tue Apr 26, 2016 5:53 pm

Quoting DiamondFlyer (Reply 148):
What part of "Shall not be infringed" do you not understand?

But there are multiple infringements already in place.

I've yet to hear the pro-gun's reasoned argument against licensing and testing, just as is required before you can drive a car on public roads.
 
DiamondFlyer
Posts: 3576
Joined: Wed Oct 29, 2008 11:50 pm

RE: Yet Another US Shooting, 6 Dead.

Tue Apr 26, 2016 6:04 pm

Quoting scbriml (Reply 153):
I've yet to hear the pro-gun's reasoned argument against licensing and testing, just as is required before you can drive a car on public roads.

So you would be ok with licensing and testing prior to being able to vote then too? Because owning guns and voting are more closely related than owning guns and driving.

-DiamondFlyer
 
User avatar
flyingturtle
Posts: 6201
Joined: Mon Oct 31, 2011 1:39 pm

RE: Yet Another US Shooting, 6 Dead.

Tue Apr 26, 2016 6:07 pm

Quoting DiamondFlyer (Reply 148):
What part of "Shall not be infringed" do you not understand?

Interestingly, "to infringe" had a different meaning when the constitution was written.

Webster's dictionary of 1828 - here http://webstersdictionary1828.com/Dictionary/infringe - speaks of violating or breaking a contract. Today's meaning relates to encroaching or limiting something.

In the past, the US government was not allowed to forbid gun ownerships.

Today's meaning of "to infringe" implies that the government is not allowed to limit gun ownership.


David
 
Scorpio
Posts: 5055
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2001 3:48 am

RE: Yet Another US Shooting, 6 Dead.

Tue Apr 26, 2016 6:20 pm

Quoting DiamondFlyer (Reply 154):
Because owning guns and voting are more closely related than owning guns and driving.

30,000+ people die in the US every year as a result of voting?

Never knew!
 
mham001
Posts: 5745
Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2005 4:52 am

RE: Yet Another US Shooting, 6 Dead.

Tue Apr 26, 2016 7:33 pm

Quoting MrHMSH (Reply 58):
Not entirely true, what happens in other countries is usually of great interest to people in the USA, just see the Brexit forum!

Really. Would you care to do a percentage comparison?

What is more interesting is that you have not one post in that thread (as do few, if any, of the foreign flagged critics who populate this and every US domestic policy thread) but have a dozen or so in this one.

Which issue really affects you more? It appears you are telling yourself US guns do. This is not healthy, considering US guns actually have zero effect on your life.
 
flipdewaf
Posts: 4322
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2006 6:28 am

RE: Yet Another US Shooting, 6 Dead.

Tue Apr 26, 2016 7:52 pm

Quoting DiamondFlyer (Reply 154):
So you would be ok with licensing and testing prior to being able to vote then too? Because owning guns and voting are more closely related than owning guns and driving.

well I'm pretty sure people have to be registered to vote and so therefore on a list (OMG!) and then to make sure they don't vote twice they check each person off that list and can then see if they have excercised your right to vote. 'Freedom implosion'

Fred
 
User avatar
scbriml
Posts: 20311
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2003 10:37 pm

RE: Yet Another US Shooting, 6 Dead.

Tue Apr 26, 2016 8:16 pm

Quoting DiamondFlyer (Reply 154):
So you would be ok with licensing and testing prior to being able to vote then too?

In most democracies, voters are already 'licenced' by virtue of being registered. Putting a cross on a piece of paper really doesn't require much in the way of training, but even for the idiots, there are instructions in the voting booth.

So again, what's the real issue with requiring a icence and at least a basic level of training in order to own a gun?
 
TheCommodore
Topic Author
Posts: 3458
Joined: Tue Dec 25, 2007 2:14 am

RE: Yet Another US Shooting, 6 Dead.

Tue Apr 26, 2016 9:28 pm

Quoting scbriml (Reply 159):
So again, what's the real issue with requiring a icence and at least a basic level of training in order to own a gun?

This will be interesting..... if your lucky enough to get an answer

Quoting Scorpio (Reply 156):
30,000+ people die in the US every year as a result of voting?

Never knew!

Its dangerous voting.... remember !
 
User avatar
MrHMSH
Posts: 2922
Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2013 7:32 pm

RE: Yet Another US Shooting, 6 Dead.

Tue Apr 26, 2016 9:56 pm

Quoting mham001 (Reply 157):
Really. Would you care to do a percentage comparison?

100% of me can't be bothered to do the comparison. But there are US flags in the Brexit one which tells me that some Americans take an interest. I didn't say all.

Quoting mham001 (Reply 157):
What is more interesting is that you have not one post in that thread (as do few, if any, of the foreign flagged critics who populate this and every US domestic policy thread) but have a dozen or so in this one.

I don't have anything to say on the Brexit thread. Silence =/= lack of interest.

Quoting mham001 (Reply 157):
Which issue really affects you more? It appears you are telling yourself US guns do. This is not healthy, considering US guns actually have zero effect on your life.

I've told you multiple times that I enjoy the debate.

But do you actually know how much it affects me? I mean you don't know me at all.
 
flipdewaf
Posts: 4322
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2006 6:28 am

RE: Yet Another US Shooting, 6 Dead.

Tue Apr 26, 2016 10:04 pm

Quoting mham001 (Reply 157):
This is not healthy, considering US guns actually have zero effect on your life

maybe it's in the nature of Europeans and the more 'socialist' societies that teach people to look outwards and care for others outside of the direct line of family and US culture is based more on furthering self interest.

Fred
 
User avatar
EA CO AS
Posts: 15891
Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2001 8:54 am

RE: Yet Another US Shooting, 6 Dead.

Tue Apr 26, 2016 11:37 pm

Quoting lapa_saab340 (Reply 143):
The burglar will think twice about breaking into a home in an area where owners are known to be armed.

  

Quoting lapa_saab340 (Reply 144):
Please, can you be more ridiculous? Do you have a sixth sense that tells you what an intruder is doing breaking into your home? Or will you politely ask him?

  

Quoting Scorpio (Reply 152):
Because I said the BURGLAR will be much more likely to shoot at the first thing that moves if there is a big chance the owner is armed.

So once again, it's somehow the fault of responsible gun owners - just by existing - that a burglar might now decide to be armed when committing their crimes? C'mon, man....   
 
User avatar
seb146
Posts: 24170
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:19 am

RE: Yet Another US Shooting, 6 Dead.

Wed Apr 27, 2016 12:31 am

Quoting TheCommodore (Reply 160):
Its dangerous voting.... remember !

Hanging chads can cause severe paper cuts that can lead to infection....

Quoting DiamondFlyer (Reply 154):
So you would be ok with licensing and testing prior to being able to vote then too? Because owning guns and voting are more closely related than owning guns and driving.

This makes no sense. I am disappointed a statement like this would come from you. You do understand that both cars and guns kill more people than voting. Why should a killing machine not be registered and regulated? I gather you want cars to no longer be insured and licenced and allow anyone to drive?

Quoting DiamondFlyer (Reply 150):
What's an oozie?

Something you take a pill for.

Trying to inject some humor into this thread....

Quoting DiamondFlyer (Reply 150):
Can a 3 year old child vote, no, and they can't own a gun either.

Yet, 3 year olds shoot and injure and kill enough people in this country it is worth talking about.

Quoting DiamondFlyer (Reply 148):
What part of "Shall not be infringed" do you not understand?

What part of "well regulated militia" do you not understand?
 
DiamondFlyer
Posts: 3576
Joined: Wed Oct 29, 2008 11:50 pm

RE: Yet Another US Shooting, 6 Dead.

Wed Apr 27, 2016 12:53 am

Quoting seb146 (Reply 164):
Hanging chads can cause severe paper cuts that can lead to infection....

Or it can lead to the election of people who campaign on the promise of throwing away the very document they are being elected to and swear to preserve, protect and defend.

Quoting seb146 (Reply 164):
This makes no sense. I am disappointed a statement like this would come from you. You do understand that both cars and guns kill more people than voting. Why should a killing machine not be registered and regulated? I gather you want cars to no longer be insured and licenced and allow anyone to drive?

Two of the three are rights given by the Constitution and one is not. For you to not understand that, makes me scared for the road this country is headed down. It will be a swift but bloody civil war, in which the anti gunners like yourself quickly learn why the 2A exists, to prevent control of the people by a tyrannical government you so desire..

Quoting seb146 (Reply 164):
What part of "well regulated militia" do you not understand?

Obviously you have a lack of understanding of the English language, but that's not really a shock to me.

-DiamondFlyer
 
User avatar
EA CO AS
Posts: 15891
Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2001 8:54 am

RE: Yet Another US Shooting, 6 Dead.

Wed Apr 27, 2016 1:06 am

Quoting seb146 (Reply 164):
Hanging chads

The plural of chad is also chad. Haven't you seen "Recount" ?  
Quoting seb146 (Reply 164):
This makes no sense. I am disappointed a statement like this would come from you. You do understand that both cars and guns kill more people than voting

The relative ability or potential to result in death isn't criteria used to establish rights.

Quoting seb146 (Reply 164):
I gather you want cars to no longer be insured and licenced and allow anyone to drive?

Show me which part of the Constitution allows the right to drive and we can discuss it. Until then...

Quoting seb146 (Reply 164):
Quoting DiamondFlyer (Reply 148):What part of "Shall not be infringed" do you not understand?

What part of "well regulated militia" do you not understand?

I guess you should ask that same questions of the majority of the remaining 8 wise souls in Washington D.C. as they appeared to grasp what was being said.

Justice Antonin Scalia, writing for the majority in District of Columbia v. Heller:

Nowhere else in the Constitution does a "right" attributed to "the people" refer to anything other than an individual right. What is more, in all six other provisions of the Constitution that mention "the people," the term unambiguously refers to all members of the political community, not an unspecified subset. This contrasts markedly with the phrase "the militia" in the prefatory clause. As we will describe below, the "militia" in colonial America consisted of a subset of "the people"— those who were male, able bodied, and within a certain age range. Reading the Second Amendment as protecting only the right to "keep and bear Arms" in an organized militia therefore fits poorly with the operative clause’s description of the holder of that right as "the people".

The majority opinion also said that the amendment's prefatory clause (referencing the "militia") serves to clarify the operative clause (referencing "the people"), but does not limit the scope of the operative clause, because "the 'militia' in colonial America consisted of a subset of 'the people'.

[Edited 2016-04-26 18:07:46]
 
User avatar
MrHMSH
Posts: 2922
Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2013 7:32 pm

RE: Yet Another US Shooting, 6 Dead.

Wed Apr 27, 2016 1:09 am

Quoting DiamondFlyer (Reply 165):
Two of the three are rights given by the Constitution and one is not. For you to not understand that, makes me scared for the road this country is headed down. It will be a swift but bloody civil war, in which the anti gunners like yourself quickly learn why the 2A exists, to prevent control of the people by a tyrannical government you so desire..

You know you can vote this government out right? Democracy does mean 'people power'. And even if it was the case that your government was tyrannical, they have properly trained people with guns, tanks, aircraft, warships, submarines with cruise missiles and NUKES. If they wanted to be a dictatorship they've got all the tools they need. Gunners like you would be swiftly dealt with by 50 languages of guided weapons.

Or alternatively, the military tells the government where to stick it and you're just left with some guys in suits standing around awkwardly.

You won't have a civil war, the comfortable lives lived by Americans sees to that. If you genuinely think that you having guns means you can protect yourself from your government then you'll probably be shocked if things did go tits up.
 
MaverickM11
Posts: 18742
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2000 1:59 pm

RE: Yet Another US Shooting, 6 Dead.

Wed Apr 27, 2016 2:02 am

Quoting DiamondFlyer (Reply 154):
So you would be ok with licensing and testing prior to being able to vote then too?

The GOP is CONSTANTLY trying to do exactly that. Try again.

Quoting EA CO AS (Reply 136):
After having scoured this report, there are plenty of references to firearm-related deaths, however not one mention of gangs or gang-related activity. I absolutely stand corrected, mea culpa.

Mmmhmmm...the NRA repeating false information all over the web. Imagine that.

Quoting EA CO AS (Reply 136):
The total number of gang homicides reported by respondents in the NYGS sample averaged nearly 2,000 annually from 2007 to 2012. During roughly the same time period (2007 to 2011), the FBI estimated, on average, more than 15,500 homicides across the United States

So something like 9000 homicides/year are non gang related gun homicides. Quite a different story.
 
User avatar
zckls04
Posts: 2785
Joined: Fri Dec 30, 2011 6:55 pm

RE: Yet Another US Shooting, 6 Dead.

Wed Apr 27, 2016 3:17 am

Quoting mham001 (Reply 157):
Really. Would you care to do a percentage comparison?

Can you please give this a rest. This is an international discussion forum, and every thread which relates to the US is polluted with your complaints that only US denizens should be allowed to comment.

It's boring. It stifles debate. Stop it.
 
YVRLTN
Posts: 2349
Joined: Wed Oct 04, 2006 1:49 pm

RE: Yet Another US Shooting, 6 Dead.

Wed Apr 27, 2016 4:13 am

Quoting TheCommodore (Reply 160):
Its dangerous voting.... remember !

Sure is



or



I think you will all need lots of guns to deal with either of those two.
 
User avatar
seahawk
Posts: 10417
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 1:29 am

RE: Yet Another US Shooting, 6 Dead.

Wed Apr 27, 2016 5:06 am

Quoting flipdewaf (Reply 162):

maybe it's in the nature of Europeans and the more 'socialist' societies that teach people to look outwards and care for others outside of the direct line of family and US culture is based more on furthering self interest.

Fred

Or a tendency to forbid everything they do not understand or what does not fit into the bubble of social well being. Europeans have a large list of things they want changed, but are none of their problems. US guns, Chinese dog eating, ...
 
Scorpio
Posts: 5055
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2001 3:48 am

RE: Yet Another US Shooting, 6 Dead.

Wed Apr 27, 2016 5:14 am

Quoting EA CO AS (Reply 163):
So once again, it's somehow the fault of responsible gun owners - just by existing - that a burglar might now decide to be armed when committing their crimes? C'mon, man....

Seriously, your 'beating about the bush' is getting quite silly. I repeat, for the third time: in which society is a burglar more likely to be armed, and more likely to be prepared to shoot at the first thing that moves?

Just answer the question. Objectively, without short-circuiting on what that says. It's not that hard.

And you agree with a statement that I've already proven false, i.e. that burglars will be less likely to break into a home in an area or country where the owners are more likely to be armed? Because I've already pointed out that that simply isn't the case, the numbers show that it isn't. So why still agree?
 
User avatar
seb146
Posts: 24170
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:19 am

RE: Yet Another US Shooting, 6 Dead.

Wed Apr 27, 2016 6:49 am

Quoting DiamondFlyer (Reply 165):
Obviously you have a lack of understanding of the English language, but that's not really a shock to me.

So the Second Amendment does not say "well regulated militia"? When did that happen? Or is my copy of the Constitution completely different than yours?

Quoting DiamondFlyer (Reply 165):
Or it can lead to the election of people who campaign on the promise of throwing away the very document they are being elected to and swear to preserve, protect and defend.

Why were no arms taken up by private citizens such as yourself over Patriot Act? Where were the militias defending the Boston Marathon or movie theaters in Aurora or the Sandy Hook school? If guns were so great, why are there so many dead because of them?

Quoting DiamondFlyer (Reply 165):
Two of the three are rights given by the Constitution and one is not.

A little bit of history:

The Founding Fathers did not want a king. They also wanted the people to know that, if there were an elected king in the early days of the Republic, there was an option: violence. The Founding Fathers never wanted corporations to be people, they never wanted an elite ruling class on this grand of a scale, and they never wanted semi- and fully-automatic weapons because they did not exist in the numbers they do today.

If all you gun nuts want to shoot guns so badly, join the Army. What about my right to not be shot because "I didn't know the gun was loaded" or "I didn't know Junior had my gun" or any number of excuses "responsible" gun owners come up with.

Notice, too, that they are all "responsible" gun owners but are kicked out of the "responsible" gun owners group when something stupid invariably happens.
 
User avatar
scbriml
Posts: 20311
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2003 10:37 pm

RE: Yet Another US Shooting, 6 Dead.

Wed Apr 27, 2016 7:29 am

Quoting TheCommodore (Reply 160):
This will be interesting..... if your lucky enough to get an answer

Not a surprise, eh?   

Quoting EA CO AS (Reply 163):
that a burglar might now decide to be armed when committing their crimes?

Yet in the UK, for example, the exact opposite is true. Domestic burglars are unarmed because they know the house occupants are unarmed. Go figure!
 
diverted
Posts: 1308
Joined: Sat May 17, 2014 3:17 pm

RE: Yet Another US Shooting, 6 Dead.

Wed Apr 27, 2016 3:57 pm

Quoting DiamondFlyer (Reply 148):
What part of "Shall not be infringed" do you not understand?

Seems that right now the US' gun issue seems to be not very well regulated, seeing as people are getting murdered left and right.

Quoting scbriml (Reply 153):
But there are multiple infringements already in place. I've yet to hear the pro-gun's reasoned argument against licensing and testing, just as is required before you can drive a car on public roads.

For that matter, I'd like to go talk to the nice folks at Boeing and pick up a new Super Hornet, kitted out with some pave lows, air to ground missiles, etc. I'd then like to go around and fly around doing target practice over my ranch and shoot up some old scrap cars. But, I feel like the government wouldn't let me do that. So, I guess then my right to bear arms is being infringed (and don't say that it's irrelevant because I have a maple leaf next to my name; I could easily have dual citizenship, be an American citizen/Canadian permanent resident)

So, where do we draw the line? Do we take the approach that many countries have taken? Ban full autos, and have a limit on the size of the magazine you can carry? Should we take it back and only allow weapons that were around when the 2nd amendment was written? Or do we allow everything carte blanche? I think the answer would either have to be either allow everything, or allow only weapons that were around when the 2nd amendment was written. Because I highly doubt that full auto assault rifles were what the founding fathers had in store. Also, having to stop and reload a musket provides people a good chance to run away and not have a massacre....

Thoughts?
 
Scorpio
Posts: 5055
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2001 3:48 am

RE: Yet Another US Shooting, 6 Dead.

Wed Apr 27, 2016 4:03 pm

Quoting EA CO AS (Reply 163):
So once again, it's somehow the fault of responsible gun owners - just by existing - that a burglar might now decide to be armed when committing their crimes? C'mon, man....

Why do you refuse to answer the question? In which country would a burglar be more likely be armed, and more likely to be on edge enough to shoot at the first thing that moves? Just answer that question, without worrying about what that implies or how you can twist it in such a way that you can make it seem like I said something disgraceful. Objectively answer the question. It's not that hard.

Plus, you agree with a statement that was already proven false. Why? If it were true that burglars are less likely to break into a home when there's a bigger chance the owner has a gun (as is the case in the US), one would expect the number of burglaries in the US to be considerably lower than they are in the rest of the western world where there are far fewer guns. The actual numbers do not show that to be the case. Why are you ignoring that?
 
User avatar
scbriml
Posts: 20311
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2003 10:37 pm

RE: Yet Another US Shooting, 6 Dead.

Wed Apr 27, 2016 10:32 pm

Yay, another responsible gun owner arms a toddler with disastrous consequences.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-36152462
 
User avatar
EA CO AS
Posts: 15891
Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2001 8:54 am

RE: Yet Another US Shooting, 6 Dead.

Thu Apr 28, 2016 12:09 am

Quoting seb146 (Reply 173):
So the Second Amendment does not say "well regulated militia"? When did that happen? Or is my copy of the Constitution completely different than yours?

No, the United States Supreme Court just reads and interprets it differently than you do.   
 
User avatar
seb146
Posts: 24170
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:19 am

RE: Yet Another US Shooting, 6 Dead.

Thu Apr 28, 2016 12:58 am

Quoting EA CO AS (Reply 178):
No, the United States Supreme Court just reads and interprets it differently than you do.

And once either Hillary or Bernie are elected, the Supreme Court will finally realize the words "well regulated militia" do actually and in fact appear in the Second Amendment and rule accordingly.

Or, Mitch McConnell can save us all the agony and just approve an Obama nominee, instead of doing nothing for the next eight months....
 
DiamondFlyer
Posts: 3576
Joined: Wed Oct 29, 2008 11:50 pm

RE: Yet Another US Shooting, 6 Dead.

Thu Apr 28, 2016 2:27 am

Quoting seb146 (Reply 179):
And once either Hillary or Bernie are elected, the Supreme Court will finally realize the words "well regulated militia" do actually and in fact appear in the Second Amendment and rule accordingly.

Just because a new judge is appointed, doesn't mean they can go back and reverse the decision of a previous case. A similar case would have to get to the court for it to be ruled upon.

Quoting diverted (Reply 175):
So, where do we draw the line? Do we take the approach that many countries have taken? Ban full autos, and have a limit on the size of the magazine you can carry? Should we take it back and only allow weapons that were around when the 2nd amendment was written? Or do we allow everything carte blanche? I think the answer would either have to be either allow everything, or allow only weapons that were around when the 2nd amendment was written. Because I highly doubt that full auto assault rifles were what the founding fathers had in store. Also, having to stop and reload a musket provides people a good chance to run away and not have a massacre....

Judging by this response, you have no idea what the actual gun laws in the United States are. Full auto guns are already defacto banned, by a Republican president. The ones that are already built can be sold, after an extensive background check and by spending tens of thousands of dollars.

But again, the anti-gunners don't care to see the actual law, they just make up whatever they want to push for their 1984 state of totalitarianism.

-DiamondFlyer
 
wingman
Posts: 4209
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 4:25 am

RE: Yet Another US Shooting, 6 Dead.

Thu Apr 28, 2016 2:37 am

Quoting seb146 (Reply 179):
And once either Hillary or Bernie are elected, the Supreme Court will finally realize the words "well regulated militia" do actually and in fact appear in the Second Amendment and rule accordingly.

Once HRC is in the White House many expect her to nominate up to 3 replacement judges in her 8 years of tenure. Gun ownership in this country will never be outlawed, but it will become regulated just like motor vehicle ownership and operation. In hindsight, probably 30 years from now, hardcore Republicans and the NRA will rue the decades they spent arguing that unfettered manufacture and distribution of weapons into the hands of every man, woman, and child in this country was the only solution. All the vast majority of gun control proponents ever wanted was to attempt a solution so tried, true and tested elsewhere, and that has resulted in a quite harmonious balance between active gun ownership/usage and very low gun death rates.

Our Constitution can and will be reinterpreted according to what I firmly believe the Founding Fathers would've agreed is the only sensible interpretation. Even they would have witnessed 1,400,000 gun deaths in 48 years and said enough is enough. We argue over thousands of deaths here and there, but in my lifetime we've buried the in EXCESS of every American ever killed in the War of Independence, the Civil War, WWI, WWI, Korea, Vietnam, Gulf War I and Gulf War II. Anyone who doesn't see the need for change, a simple change that would impose little more than what it takes to get a driver's license and buy and drive a car is not sensible and they will lose this war in the long run. It's a war of ideas, compassion, and intelligence against utter disdain for the value of life. 1,400,000 dead since 1968...how could anyone not want to try a different approach?
 
User avatar
seb146
Posts: 24170
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:19 am

RE: Yet Another US Shooting, 6 Dead.

Thu Apr 28, 2016 3:16 am

Quoting DiamondFlyer (Reply 180):
Just because a new judge is appointed, doesn't mean they can go back and reverse the decision of a previous case. A similar case would have to get to the court for it to be ruled upon

You better believe that will happen. Especially with the ongoing rash of kids shooting their parents. Something must be done.

Quoting wingman (Reply 181):
Gun ownership in this country will never be outlawed

No, it won't. No one, including me, want a complete ban on guns. But, the current out-of-control gun craze needs to come to a flash point. Unfortunately, when a class full of kids are gunned down by a single white guy, there will probably be no flash point.
 
User avatar
EA CO AS
Posts: 15891
Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2001 8:54 am

RE: Yet Another US Shooting, 6 Dead.

Thu Apr 28, 2016 5:41 am

Quoting seb146 (Reply 179):
Quoting EA CO AS (Reply 178):No, the United States Supreme Court just reads and interprets it differently than you do.
And once either Hillary or Bernie are elected, the Supreme Court will finally realize the words "well regulated militia" do actually and in fact appear in the Second Amendment and rule accordingly.

Extremely unlikely. It's settled law now, just like Roe v. Wade is.

Quoting seb146 (Reply 182):
Quoting DiamondFlyer (Reply 180):Just because a new judge is appointed, doesn't mean they can go back and reverse the decision of a previous case. A similar case would have to get to the court for it to be ruled upon
You better believe that will happen.

Guess again. SCOTUS doesn't like to reverse itself, and certainly doesn't after just a few years.


I have to wonder if there'd ever be a time where a presidential candidate would come right out to the electorate and state, "My perspective is that Roe v. Wade and D.C. v. Heller are settled law, and I will not appoint anyone to be a Supreme Court Justice who would challenge either ruling."
 
User avatar
flyingturtle
Posts: 6201
Joined: Mon Oct 31, 2011 1:39 pm

RE: Yet Another US Shooting, 6 Dead.

Thu Apr 28, 2016 9:41 am

Quoting YVRLTN (Reply 170):
I think you will all need lots of guns to deal with either of those two.

Hillaryous!

I fear both of them, honestly.

Quoting scbriml (Reply 174):
Yet in the UK, for example, the exact opposite is true. Domestic burglars are unarmed because they know the house occupants are unarmed. Go figure!

Likewise in Switzerland. Despite many households having an assault rifle at home (and the .223 Remington, which is compatible to that rifle, can be freely bought), burglars are 99.9% unarmed. Firearm use by the police is extremely rare, too.

Quoting EA CO AS (Reply 178):
No, the United States Supreme Court just reads and interprets it differently than you do.

A ruling that uncouples the two clauses of the 2nd Amendment is not to be trusted. I have not yet found a convincing explanation of why "A well regulated militia..." should be seen separate from "the right to keep and arm bears...". One can allege that I don't understand the English language well, or that I'm stupid, but I'm still waiting for proof of either allegation.

Okay, here's an example. How would you apply something like "For securing the wellbeing of the whole family, the right to carry out intimate acts at any time shall not be abridged"?

Would it be out-of-jail-free card for any rapist that happens to be married? Would you ignore the so-called "prefatory clause", which guarantees the right only in the frame of "securing the wellbeing"?

Or, "When the vessel reached the port, the cargo was offloaded from the ship."

Or, "Because the student cheated in the exams, the dean was right to exclude him from college."

The cargo is not offloaded just somewhere, in the middle of the ocean. The student can't be expelled from college just because the dean likes to do so.

In these examples as well as in the 2nd Amendment, if you ignore the first part, the meaning of the second is fundamentally changed. Yes, "A well regulated militia" does set the scene in which the "right to keep and bear arms" unfolds its meaning.

And where is this militia? Nowhere. The general population with their handguns cannot fight the standing armies of the US gubmint. And all these gun-owners are not "well-regulated", either. They adhere to their own standards of responsibility, and leave toddlers with deadly weapons.

In other news, the SCOTUS has become polarized and partisan. Since years, the rate of 5-to-4 decisions lingers at 20%, while the rate was lower than 10% before the 1941 Stone court. The 5-4 decisions are signs of luck (or partisanship), while clear 9-0, 8-1, 7-2 or 6-3 decisions show that justices appointed by both liberal and conservative presidents come to similar conclusions despite their different backgrounds.

A 5-4 decision does not carry the same moral weight than a 9-0 one. Heller was a 5-4 decision.

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/...ation-of-the-supreme-court/259155/

http://stanfordpolitics.com/2016/01/...partisanship-of-the-supreme-court/


David

[Edited 2016-04-28 02:45:39]
 
User avatar
seb146
Posts: 24170
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:19 am

RE: Yet Another US Shooting, 6 Dead.

Thu Apr 28, 2016 4:04 pm

Quoting EA CO AS (Reply 183):
I have to wonder if there'd ever be a time where a presidential candidate would come right out to the electorate and state, "My perspective is that Roe v. Wade and D.C. v. Heller are settled law, and I will not appoint anyone to be a Supreme Court Justice who would challenge either ruling."

Never.

Quoting EA CO AS (Reply 183):
Guess again. SCOTUS doesn't like to reverse itself, and certainly doesn't after just a few years.

They do not have to reverse themselves. All someone has to do is file a lawsuit based on a different law. Texas would probably be the most logical defendant. Lack of security for my personal well being with fewer and fewer gun regulations is against my right to life, as an example.

Flyingturtle's post sums things up nicely.
 
User avatar
EA CO AS
Posts: 15891
Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2001 8:54 am

RE: Yet Another US Shooting, 6 Dead.

Thu Apr 28, 2016 4:51 pm

Quoting seb146 (Reply 185):
They do not have to reverse themselves. All someone has to do is file a lawsuit based on a different law

You know what I mean; issuing a ruling in a new case that in effect reverses the previous one.
 
L-188
Posts: 29881
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 1999 11:27 am

RE: Yet Another US Shooting, 6 Dead.

Thu Apr 28, 2016 11:58 pm

Quoting DiamondFlyer (Reply 180):

Judging by this response, you have no idea what the actual gun laws in the United States are.

That is one of the biggest issues with gun-grabbers. They have no idea what the actual laws are and what laws the democrats are refusing to enforce. Half the alleged "gun problem" comes from the democrats such as Clinton and Obama not allowing federal agencies enforce the law.

Quoting DiamondFlyer (Reply 180):
But again, the anti-gunners don't care to see the actual law, they just make up whatever they want to push for their 1984 state of totalitarianism.

Ditto.

Quoting seb146 (Reply 182):
No one, including me, want a complete ban on guns.

I call bull on that statement. Your comments on this issue do not bear that out.

Quoting seb146 (Reply 182):
Unfortunately, when a class full of kids are gunned down by a single white guy, there will probably be no flash point.

You type that as if you actually want that to happen so you can post "SEE!!!!" here and rub in firearms owners noses.
 
coolian2
Posts: 2483
Joined: Sun Oct 22, 2006 3:34 pm

RE: Yet Another US Shooting, 6 Dead.

Fri Apr 29, 2016 12:03 am

Quoting L-188 (Reply 187):
You type that as if you actually want that to happen so you can post "SEE!!!!" here and rub in firearms owners noses.

It's already happened.

You still also haven't found me those direct quotes in this thread asking for a complete gun ban. Shall I assume they're not forthcoming?
 
L-188
Posts: 29881
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 1999 11:27 am

RE: Yet Another US Shooting, 6 Dead.

Fri Apr 29, 2016 12:13 am

Quoting coolian2 (Reply 188):
You still also haven't found me those direct quotes in this thread asking for a complete gun ban. Shall I assume they're not forthcoming?

If you didn't see them then you were not looking.
 
User avatar
MrHMSH
Posts: 2922
Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2013 7:32 pm

RE: Yet Another US Shooting, 6 Dead.

Fri Apr 29, 2016 12:22 am

Quoting L-188 (Reply 187):
I call bull on that statement. Your comments on this issue do not bear that out.

You can quote what anyone has said in this forum.

If you're not convinced, I'll make clear my position below:

I don't think guns should be banned, because people need them, indeed I have no objections to people owning guns in the UK, and people do own them. However I do think they should be regulated in such a way that the only people who have guns are people that need them, and are certifiably safe to own them. Because the number of gun deaths in the USA is far too high, it is far higher than countries that are otherwise just as developed.

Quoting L-188 (Reply 187):
That is one of the biggest issues with gun-grabbers. They have no idea what the actual laws are and what laws the democrats are refusing to enforce. Half the alleged "gun problem" comes from the democrats such as Clinton and Obama not allowing federal agencies enforce the law.

It doesn't matter who the gun problem comes from, you have it and you can sort it out but don't.

Quoting L-188 (Reply 187):
You type that as if you actually want that to happen so you can post "SEE!!!!" here and rub in firearms owners noses.

The nature of the problem means that we can be almost certain of something unpleasant happening, just a case of where and when. Meanwhile, we've just gone a 7350th day without a mass shooting in the UK, but people who need guns have them. C'est facile, la vie!
 
coolian2
Posts: 2483
Joined: Sun Oct 22, 2006 3:34 pm

RE: Yet Another US Shooting, 6 Dead.

Fri Apr 29, 2016 1:30 am

Quoting L-188 (Reply 189):
If you didn't see them then you were not looking.

You made the claim, I asked for your evidence.

None is forthcoming, so it's clear you were simply being dishonest with your claims.
 
TheCommodore
Topic Author
Posts: 3458
Joined: Tue Dec 25, 2007 2:14 am

RE: Yet Another US Shooting, 6 Dead.

Fri Apr 29, 2016 2:02 am

Quoting L-188 (Reply 187):
Your comments on this issue do not bear that out.

Then quote where he says he wants a complete ban.... we'er waiting !

Quoting L-188 (Reply 187):
You type that as if you actually want that to happen so you can post "SEE!!!!" here and rub in firearms owners noses.

Just give it a few days... it will happen ....again

Quoting coolian2 (Reply 188):
You still also haven't found me those direct quotes in this thread asking for a complete gun ban.

Simply because he cant.
 
Quoting L-188 (Reply 189):
If you didn't see them then you were not looking.

Umm, we are all reading the same thread....

Maybe your computer is playing up ?

Quoting MrHMSH (Reply 190):
You can quote what anyone has said in this forum.

He can, but but but.... there aren't any quotes

Quoting MrHMSH (Reply 190):
It doesn't matter who the gun problem comes from, you have it and you can sort it out but don't.

Exactly. They just go on and on blaming each other.

Quoting MrHMSH (Reply 190):
The nature of the problem means that we can be almost certain of something unpleasant happening, just a case of where and when.

Certain all right. The clocks ticking.

Quoting coolian2 (Reply 191):
You made the claim, I asked for your evidence.

None is forthcoming, so it's clear you were simply being dishonest with your claims.

        
 
QF29
Posts: 133
Joined: Mon Apr 08, 2013 7:10 am

RE: Yet Another US Shooting, 6 Dead.

Fri Apr 29, 2016 2:05 am

Yesterday was the 20th anniversary of the Port Arthur Massacre in Tasmania. RIP

This was event that changed gun Laws in Australia for the better, the last time we had a mass shooting was 10 years ago in Melbourne (if memory serves me correctly).

Its time the US woke up, no one is asking for a total ban on guns, only common seance laws and regulation!!
 
DiamondFlyer
Posts: 3576
Joined: Wed Oct 29, 2008 11:50 pm

RE: Yet Another US Shooting, 6 Dead.

Fri Apr 29, 2016 4:14 am

Quoting MrHMSH (Reply 190):
I don't think guns should be banned, because people need them, indeed I have no objections to people owning guns in the UK, and people do own them. However I do think they should be regulated in such a way that the only people who have guns are people that need them, and are certifiably safe to own them. Because the number of gun deaths in the USA is far too high, it is far higher than countries that are otherwise just as developed.

So, regulations on guns and a government decision on if you really need a gun or not. So basically, you just advocated a total confiscation, unless you can afford to pay off the property party members then. Guns for the protection of the elite politicians, government and business types. The exactly reason the 2A was created

Quoting qf29 (Reply 193):
Its time the US woke up, no one is asking for a total ban on guns, only common seance laws and regulation!!

Common sense gun laws? Repeal the NFA, make suppressors common place, to prevent hearing damage and noise pollution of shooting ranges. That would be common sense. Randomly banning types of guns because of what they look like, is stupidity.

-DiamondFlyer
 
User avatar
seb146
Posts: 24170
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:19 am

RE: Yet Another US Shooting, 6 Dead.

Fri Apr 29, 2016 4:27 am

Quoting DiamondFlyer (Reply 194):
Common sense gun laws? Repeal the NFA, make suppressors common place, to prevent hearing damage and noise pollution of shooting ranges. That would be common sense. Randomly banning types of guns because of what they look like, is stupidity.

C'mon, now.... We are not talking about an all-or-nothing proposition. The only ones saying that are you and the NRA and the gun nuts. It is the whole "slippery slope" argument. The United States has not been smited by God for letting the gays get married. The United States has not been blown off the face of the Earth for making pot not as bad. The United States has not had any bad thing happen now that health care is a little more affordable. Why is it such an impossibility that there is no "slippery slope" when it comes to guns?

Or is it because dead people can not vote so eff it, lets just all get whatever guns we want?

See how the "all or nothing" argument works both ways?
 
User avatar
MrHMSH
Posts: 2922
Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2013 7:32 pm

RE: Yet Another US Shooting, 6 Dead.

Fri Apr 29, 2016 4:37 am

Quoting DiamondFlyer (Reply 194):
So, regulations on guns and a government decision on if you really need a gun or not. So basically, you just advocated a total confiscation, unless you can afford to pay off the property party members then.

I'd make it free and I'd not take guns unless it was clear that they'd be a danger. Not an easy job, but better than 'we have more mass shootings than Earth rotations' as it is.

Quoting DiamondFlyer (Reply 194):
Guns for the protection of the elite politicians, government and business types. The exactly reason the 2A was created

They have better-trained soldiers with better guns, tanks, aircraft, submarines with cruise missiles and nuclear weapons. You think your gun protects you against that? It's completely worthless as a means of protecting yourself as an individual, and as a collective you've got far more effective measures of getting rid of these people: a vote. And if that doesn't work you can protest, or stop working, and hit their pockets (they don't like that).

I know you think that having a gun makes you free, but it doesn't, you are not free. You never have been and never will be, it's an illusion sold to you. You have no more freedom than I do.

P.S. Just a reminder of what you're up against:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5gD_TL1BqFg
 
coolian2
Posts: 2483
Joined: Sun Oct 22, 2006 3:34 pm

RE: Yet Another US Shooting, 6 Dead.

Fri Apr 29, 2016 4:43 am

Quoting DiamondFlyer (Reply 194):
So, regulations on guns and a government decision on if you really need a gun or not. So basically, you just advocated a total confiscation, unless you can afford to pay off the property party members then. Guns for the protection of the elite politicians, government and business types. The exactly reason the 2A was created
http://www.police.govt.nz/advice/fir...ndard-new-zealand-firearms-licence

This is the kind of thing I would advocate.

I patiently await you to skim the link and scream that it's impossible.
 
User avatar
EA CO AS
Posts: 15891
Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2001 8:54 am

RE: Yet Another US Shooting, 6 Dead.

Fri Apr 29, 2016 6:26 am

Quoting coolian2 (Reply 197):
I patiently await you to skim the link and scream that it's impossible.

It's not impossible. It's just unconstitutional.
 
User avatar
scbriml
Posts: 20311
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2003 10:37 pm

RE: Yet Another US Shooting, 6 Dead.

Fri Apr 29, 2016 6:38 am

Quoting DiamondFlyer (Reply 194):
So, regulations on guns and a government decision on if you really need a gun or not. So basically, you just advocated a total confiscation, unless you can afford to pay off the property party members then. Guns for the protection of the elite politicians, government and business types. The exactly reason the 2A was created

Again with the "they want to take all my guns" and "the gubmint is after me" paranoia.   

I have still to hear a real argument against why owning a gun should not require 1 - a licence (fill out a form and get your licence); 2 - a minimum standard of training; 3 - a test of your competency with your gun to demonstrate that you've understood 2.

Why, exactly, would that be so unreasonable and how would it stop anyone who wants to own a gun from owning one?

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: art, casinterest, Exrampieyyz, skyservice_330, Tugger and 21 guests

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos