But can somebody please tell me exactly how and why the 2nd Amendment is necessary today, in this day and age..
I mean in the year 2012, right now, and in the USA of course.
What purpose is it serving? Who is it serving?
DiscoD69, can you tell me why Canada recently passed legislation ended registration of most long guns and directed the RCMP to permanently destroy more than seven million files on firearm ownership. This includes deletion of computer files as well as any relevant paper records ?
But can somebody please tell me exactly how and why the 2nd Amendment is necessary today, in this day and age..
I mean in the year 2012, right now, and in the USA of course.
What purpose is it serving? Who is it serving?
DiscoD69, can you tell me why Canada recently passed legislation ended registration of most long guns and directed the RCMP to permanently destroy more than seven million files on firearm ownership. This includes deletion of computer files as well as any relevant paper records ?
I was going to say the same thing about baseball bats and knives.
Who knew that you and I think alike?
I'f I had such a luxury as to take my pick of getting killed by a gun, baseball bat or knife...I'll pick gun every time.
The logic of the person that hypothetically wants me dead will change his mind because he has no gun is perplexing.
Ever see a murder in Papua New Guinee by tribesmen? Yes, they use spears, knives and arrows.
Well then I guess you should have a nuke too?
Nobody is going to mess with you if they know you will drop an A-bomb on their ass
I can't take that argument seriously.
..And btw, I'm still waiting for you to link empirical evidence that suggests loose gun laws lower gun crime & murder rates, which was asked of you in another thread, in case you forgot.
I was going to say the same thing about baseball bats and knives.
Who knew that you and I think alike?
I'f I had such a luxury as to take my pick of getting killed by a gun, baseball bat or knife...I'll pick gun every time.
The logic of the person that hypothetically wants me dead will change his mind because he has no gun is perplexing.
Ever see a murder in Papua New Guinee by tribesmen? Yes, they use spears, knives and arrows.
Well then I guess you should have a nuke too?
Nobody is going to mess with you if they know you will drop an A-bomb on their ass
I can't take that argument seriously.
..And btw, I'm still waiting for you to link empirical evidence that suggests loose gun laws lower gun crime & murder rates, which was asked of you in another thread, in case you forgot.
DiscoD69, can you tell me why Canada recently passed legislation ended registration of most long guns and directed the RCMP to permanently destroy more than seven million files on firearm ownership. This includes deletion of computer files as well as any relevant paper records ?
Because Conservatives have no common sense or concern for public safety(1)(2), and legislate based on ideology instead of public interest.
DiscoD69, can you tell me why Canada recently passed legislation ended registration of most long guns and directed the RCMP to permanently destroy more than seven million files on firearm ownership. This includes deletion of computer files as well as any relevant paper records ?
Because Conservatives have no common sense or concern for public safety(1)(2), and legislate based on ideology instead of public interest.
Since you are looking at it from a public safety issue look at this example:
A child murderer is in police custody. Everyone knows he did it. The problem is a dirty cop beat the confession out of him and did not read him his Miranda Warning. Should the murderer be set free because of this?
Since you are looking at it from a public safety issue look at this example:
A child murderer is in police custody. Everyone knows he did it. The problem is a dirty cop beat the confession out of him and did not read him his Miranda Warning. Should the murderer be set free because of this?
I see some of the typical responses that I was expecting.
To simplify the question, or take it to it's logical end....
rick - I am obviously in favour of most, if not all of the rights you are worried are constantly being washed away, except for this specific issue. The question is why, in this day and age, in a 'modern' society, should you have the right to own firearms?
Other rights and freedoms make sense. This one does not. Again, to take the argument to it's logical end, let me reply to another poster...
A couple years ago I realized that you have to fight for them all. You cant pick and choose what freedoms are worth defending. As much as it hurts my soul, I would defend bigoted speech because it should still be allowed under our first amendment. When you degrade the absolute nature of the freedom then you get put in jail for merely saying words. (as in Canada).
Kind of like when you allow the govt. to make a mandate that forces individuals to buy health insurance, you are opening up the ability for people that you dont like to make mandates that you disagree with.
IE making churches fund abortions, and forcing women to get an invasive test prior to abortions.
I see some of the typical responses that I was expecting.
To simplify the question, or take it to it's logical end....
rick - I am obviously in favour of most, if not all of the rights you are worried are constantly being washed away, except for this specific issue. The question is why, in this day and age, in a 'modern' society, should you have the right to own firearms?
Other rights and freedoms make sense. This one does not. Again, to take the argument to it's logical end, let me reply to another poster...
A couple years ago I realized that you have to fight for them all. You cant pick and choose what freedoms are worth defending. As much as it hurts my soul, I would defend bigoted speech because it should still be allowed under our first amendment. When you degrade the absolute nature of the freedom then you get put in jail for merely saying words. (as in Canada).
Kind of like when you allow the govt. to make a mandate that forces individuals to buy health insurance, you are opening up the ability for people that you dont like to make mandates that you disagree with.
IE making churches fund abortions, and forcing women to get an invasive test prior to abortions.
I see some of the typical responses that I was expecting.
To simplify the question, or take it to it's logical end....
rick - I am obviously in favour of most, if not all of the rights you are worried are constantly being washed away, except for this specific issue. Thequestioniswhy, inthisdayandage, ina'modern'society, shouldyouhavetherighttoownfirearms?
Other rights and freedoms make sense. This one does not. Again, to take the argument to it's logical end, let me reply to another poster...
Why should you or some people have the RIGHT to determine what's RIGHT for all ? MODERN SOCIETY - yeah,like all people are NOW civil and non-violent - unless of course you refer to some other aspect(s) such as...?
I can assure you that a government does indeed fear a well-armed citizenry.
I hope for heavenly peace on earth and for all after we perish,'til then let's be practical and deal with the realities.
I see some of the typical responses that I was expecting.
To simplify the question, or take it to it's logical end....
rick - I am obviously in favour of most, if not all of the rights you are worried are constantly being washed away, except for this specific issue. Thequestioniswhy, inthisdayandage, ina'modern'society, shouldyouhavetherighttoownfirearms?
Other rights and freedoms make sense. This one does not. Again, to take the argument to it's logical end, let me reply to another poster...
Why should you or some people have the RIGHT to determine what's RIGHT for all ? MODERN SOCIETY - yeah,like all people are NOW civil and non-violent - unless of course you refer to some other aspect(s) such as...?
I can assure you that a government does indeed fear a well-armed citizenry.
I hope for heavenly peace on earth and for all after we perish,'til then let's be practical and deal with the realities.
The question is why, in this day and age, in a 'modern' society, should you have the right to own firearms?
Because we fought and died to defeat the most powerful nation in the world with those guns ,..we fought for our freedoms and one of those is the right to bear arms ...and so that those freedoms will never be taken away from us again...we will keep our guns ...
... our firearms give us the freedom to not have to say God Save the Queen ..
The question is why, in this day and age, in a 'modern' society, should you have the right to own firearms?
Because we fought and died to defeat the most powerful nation in the world with those guns ,..we fought for our freedoms and one of those is the right to bear arms ...and so that those freedoms will never be taken away from us again...we will keep our guns ...
... our firearms give us the freedom to not have to say God Save the Queen ..
Because we fought and died to defeat the most powerful nation in the world with those guns ,..we fought for our freedoms and one of those is the right to bear arms ...and so that those freedoms will never be taken away from us again...we will keep our guns ...
... our firearms give us the freedom to not have to say God Save the Queen ..
Because we fought and died to defeat the most powerful nation in the world with those guns ,..we fought for our freedoms and one of those is the right to bear arms ...and so that those freedoms will never be taken away from us again...we will keep our guns ...
... our firearms give us the freedom to not have to say God Save the Queen ..
Nobody is going to mess with you if they know you will drop an A-bomb on their ass
I can't take that argument seriously.
..And btw, I'm still waiting for you to link empirical evidence that suggests loose gun laws lower gun crime & murder rates, which was asked of you in another thread, in case you forgot.
The so called studies that could have been done are flawed. The only way it wouldn't be flawed is if more or all of the people carried a conceled gun and took a training course on how to become most effective with them.
Criminals would be less likely to commit crimes if they knew the likeliehood of them coming home was severely decreased.
Same kind of thing in prison and high school with bullies. The people that stand up to themself get challenged less than those that dont.
Nobody is going to mess with you if they know you will drop an A-bomb on their ass
I can't take that argument seriously.
..And btw, I'm still waiting for you to link empirical evidence that suggests loose gun laws lower gun crime & murder rates, which was asked of you in another thread, in case you forgot.
The so called studies that could have been done are flawed. The only way it wouldn't be flawed is if more or all of the people carried a conceled gun and took a training course on how to become most effective with them.
Criminals would be less likely to commit crimes if they knew the likeliehood of them coming home was severely decreased.
Same kind of thing in prison and high school with bullies. The people that stand up to themself get challenged less than those that dont.
although I do believe strongly in the basic sentiment of the 2nd amendment, I think that a more common sense approach should be taken rather then a partisan extremist that try to polarize the issue...
So in your opinion... what logical common sense restrictions should be in place?
although I do believe strongly in the basic sentiment of the 2nd amendment, I think that a more common sense approach should be taken rather then a partisan extremist that try to polarize the issue...
So in your opinion... what logical common sense restrictions should be in place?
although I do believe strongly in the basic sentiment of the 2nd amendment, Ithinkthatamorecommonsenseapproachshouldbetakenratherthenapartisanextremistthattrytopolarizetheissue...
So in your opinion... what logical common sense restrictions should be in place?
Or is your answer none?
Well, it depends on what those like yourself believe to be logical. This issue like too many others have an inherent dichotomy or 'polar opposite' viewpoints. I'm personally not going to accuse people of being partisan extremists for simply having what amounts to an OPINION.
SO, what so-called logical restrictions do you have in mind.
although I do believe strongly in the basic sentiment of the 2nd amendment, Ithinkthatamorecommonsenseapproachshouldbetakenratherthenapartisanextremistthattrytopolarizetheissue...
So in your opinion... what logical common sense restrictions should be in place?
Or is your answer none?
Well, it depends on what those like yourself believe to be logical. This issue like too many others have an inherent dichotomy or 'polar opposite' viewpoints. I'm personally not going to accuse people of being partisan extremists for simply having what amounts to an OPINION.
SO, what so-called logical restrictions do you have in mind.
I know I'll catch heat for this, I'm sure rick is about to hit the ceiling...
But can somebody please tell me exactly how and why the 2nd Amendment is necessary today, in this day and age..
I mean in the year 2012, right now, and in the USA of course.
What purpose is it serving? Who is it serving?
it serves me and mine, that is who. the purpose it serves is to put food on my table and to protect me and mine, from foreign and domestic. I also like to get drunk sometimes and shoot the baby watermelons that didn't mature proper, from long range i might add
I know I'll catch heat for this, I'm sure rick is about to hit the ceiling...
But can somebody please tell me exactly how and why the 2nd Amendment is necessary today, in this day and age..
I mean in the year 2012, right now, and in the USA of course.
What purpose is it serving? Who is it serving?
it serves me and mine, that is who. the purpose it serves is to put food on my table and to protect me and mine, from foreign and domestic. I also like to get drunk sometimes and shoot the baby watermelons that didn't mature proper, from long range i might add
There are people that want the right of personal gun ownership to be abolished. Mayor Bloomberg comes to mind. Knowing that there are people of this ilk in the debate pushing for regulations makes it appear (and I think rightfully so) that these regulations are an intentional evisceration and Trojan horse meant to submarine the basic gun rights of Americans.
Knowing that most gun owners have taken a ZERO regulation policy, I know that I personally have. Even if the "regulation" makes sense there is just no way that I would support it. Like the extended magazine debate we were having after Loughner shot Giffords. I do not care about 30 round magazines for handguns. I think that people that own them are tools. I think that numerous magazines and a little bit of skill make the 30 round magazine obsolete anyway. I would never own one, and if I had a friend that did, I would be embarrassed for them. I would never in a million years support a ban on them based on principle alone.
What about bazookas? No restrictions on them? Or shoulder mounted rocket launchers?
Serious question. Is there no line? No restrictions?
There are people that want the right of personal gun ownership to be abolished. Mayor Bloomberg comes to mind. Knowing that there are people of this ilk in the debate pushing for regulations makes it appear (and I think rightfully so) that these regulations are an intentional evisceration and Trojan horse meant to submarine the basic gun rights of Americans.
Knowing that most gun owners have taken a ZERO regulation policy, I know that I personally have. Even if the "regulation" makes sense there is just no way that I would support it. Like the extended magazine debate we were having after Loughner shot Giffords. I do not care about 30 round magazines for handguns. I think that people that own them are tools. I think that numerous magazines and a little bit of skill make the 30 round magazine obsolete anyway. I would never own one, and if I had a friend that did, I would be embarrassed for them. I would never in a million years support a ban on them based on principle alone.
What about bazookas? No restrictions on them? Or shoulder mounted rocket launchers?
Serious question. Is there no line? No restrictions?
I have always wanted to own a flamethrower ..private ownership of a flamethrower is not restricted by federal law , but is restricted in some states....
I have always wanted to own a flamethrower ..private ownership of a flamethrower is not restricted by federal law , but is restricted in some states....
Well, it depends on what those like yourself believe to be logical. This issue like too many others have an inherent dichotomy or 'polar opposite' viewpoints. I'm personally not going to accuse people of being partisan extremists for simply having what amounts to an OPINION.
SO, what so-called logical restrictions do you have in mind.
So you agree with my basic point that the dichotomist view points become so polar and extreme that neither represents a common sense perspective...
And it is this polarity that only feeds a further unrealistic disparity until all you have is the assumption that one side is saying no limits on all forms of weapons and the other side therefore must be saying that they want absolutely no weapons of any kind including outlawing sling shots...
This topic is a good one for partisan extremists who have difficulty with common sense reality
Well, it depends on what those like yourself believe to be logical. This issue like too many others have an inherent dichotomy or 'polar opposite' viewpoints. I'm personally not going to accuse people of being partisan extremists for simply having what amounts to an OPINION.
SO, what so-called logical restrictions do you have in mind.
So you agree with my basic point that the dichotomist view points become so polar and extreme that neither represents a common sense perspective...
And it is this polarity that only feeds a further unrealistic disparity until all you have is the assumption that one side is saying no limits on all forms of weapons and the other side therefore must be saying that they want absolutely no weapons of any kind including outlawing sling shots...
This topic is a good one for partisan extremists who have difficulty with common sense reality
I know I'll catch heat for this, I'm sure rick is about to hit the ceiling...
But can somebody please tell me exactly how and why the 2nd Amendment is necessary today, in this day and age..
I mean in the year 2012, right now, and in the USA of course.
What purpose is it serving? Who is it serving?
Gun control means control. It means control for the government and the government starts controlling the people. I don’t like it when republicans tell me I can’t do what I want to my body and tell others what they can do in their private life and I don’t like it when democrats tell people they don’t have the right to bear arms. Freedom isn’t free and sometimes you have to except the bad that goes along with being free.
"Everything that is really great and inspiring is created by the individual who can labor in freedom." ~ Albert Einstein
Hitler had a no gun policy. You know why? Because an unarmed population can’t fight back.
“History teaches that all conquerors who have allowed their subject races to carry arms have prepared their own downfall by doing so.” ~ Hitler
"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.” ~ Thomas Jefferson
"This country, with its institutions, belongs to the people who inhabit it. Whenever they shall grow weary of the existing government, they can exercise their constitutional right of amending it or their revolutionary right to dismember it or overthrow it." ~ Abraham Lincoln
“When only cops have guns, it's called a "police state.” ~ Claire Wolfe
I know I'll catch heat for this, I'm sure rick is about to hit the ceiling...
But can somebody please tell me exactly how and why the 2nd Amendment is necessary today, in this day and age..
I mean in the year 2012, right now, and in the USA of course.
What purpose is it serving? Who is it serving?
Gun control means control. It means control for the government and the government starts controlling the people. I don’t like it when republicans tell me I can’t do what I want to my body and tell others what they can do in their private life and I don’t like it when democrats tell people they don’t have the right to bear arms. Freedom isn’t free and sometimes you have to except the bad that goes along with being free.
"Everything that is really great and inspiring is created by the individual who can labor in freedom." ~ Albert Einstein
Hitler had a no gun policy. You know why? Because an unarmed population can’t fight back.
“History teaches that all conquerors who have allowed their subject races to carry arms have prepared their own downfall by doing so.” ~ Hitler
"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.” ~ Thomas Jefferson
"This country, with its institutions, belongs to the people who inhabit it. Whenever they shall grow weary of the existing government, they can exercise their constitutional right of amending it or their revolutionary right to dismember it or overthrow it." ~ Abraham Lincoln
“When only cops have guns, it's called a "police state.” ~ Claire Wolfe
Gun control means control. It means control for the government and the government starts controlling the people. I don’t like it when republicans tell me I can’t do what I want to my body and tell others what they can do in their private life and I don’t like it when democrats tell people they don’t have the right to bear arms. Freedom isn’t free and sometimes you have to except the bad that goes along with being free.
"Everything that is really great and inspiring is created by the individual who can labor in freedom." ~ Albert Einstein
Hitler had a no gun policy. You know why? Because an unarmed population can’t fight back.
“History teaches that all conquerors who have allowed their subject races to carry arms have prepared their own downfall by doing so.” ~ Hitler
"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.” ~ Thomas Jefferson
"This country, with its institutions, belongs to the people who inhabit it. Whenever they shall grow weary of the existing government, they can exercise their constitutional right of amending it or their revolutionary right to dismember it or overthrow it." ~ Abraham Lincoln
“When only cops have guns, it's called a "police state.” ~ Claire Wolfe
Gun control means control. It means control for the government and the government starts controlling the people. I don’t like it when republicans tell me I can’t do what I want to my body and tell others what they can do in their private life and I don’t like it when democrats tell people they don’t have the right to bear arms. Freedom isn’t free and sometimes you have to except the bad that goes along with being free.
"Everything that is really great and inspiring is created by the individual who can labor in freedom." ~ Albert Einstein
Hitler had a no gun policy. You know why? Because an unarmed population can’t fight back.
“History teaches that all conquerors who have allowed their subject races to carry arms have prepared their own downfall by doing so.” ~ Hitler
"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.” ~ Thomas Jefferson
"This country, with its institutions, belongs to the people who inhabit it. Whenever they shall grow weary of the existing government, they can exercise their constitutional right of amending it or their revolutionary right to dismember it or overthrow it." ~ Abraham Lincoln
“When only cops have guns, it's called a "police state.” ~ Claire Wolfe
If you choose to make use of any information on this website including online sports betting services from any websites that may be featured on this website, we strongly recommend that you carefully check your local laws before doing so. It is your sole responsibility to understand your local laws and observe them strictly. Covers does not provide any advice or guidance as to the legality of online sports betting or other online gambling activities within your jurisdiction and you are responsible for complying with laws that are applicable to you in your relevant locality. Covers disclaims all liability associated with your use of this website and use of any information contained on it. As a condition of using this website, you agree to hold the owner of this website harmless from any claims arising from your use of any services on any third party website that may be featured by Covers.