Jump to content

Gun Legislation, Crime, and Events


Tigerbomb13

Recommended Posts

I just dropped by tonight to say that MTG is an absoulte piece of trash that represents everything that is wrong with America.  When did Republicans ever give a crap about mental health or substance abuse treatment? They are the ones that keep making cuts  

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

only 11 killed and 62 wounded this weekend in chicago!  

sounds bad?  that's cause it is bad.  but its down from the carnage of the last two years so the usual suspects will say its ok and a sign of progress and not a reflection on their policies.  after all, at least were not highland park bad!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, chasfh said:

From the mouths of Aussies …

 

The comments are a thing to behold, talking about 2A rights and all, when his point is as much about the regulation of firearms in this country.

There's a class of people (including those with robes) who, apparently, read 2A and think that regulations are a violation. Nevermind the fact that the word "regulated" is IN the amendment, all regulations bad.

Edited by mtutiger
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, mtutiger said:

The comments are a thing to behold, talking about 2A rights and all, when his point is as much about the regulation of firearms in this country.

There's a class of people (including those with robes) who, apparently, read 2A and think that regulations are a violation. Nevermind the fact that the word "regulated" is IN the amendment, all regulations bad.

"well regulated" in the 18th century meant "well organized," it did not refer to government oversight of the militia.

that shouldnt stop the government's ability to regulate the sale and distribution of firearms, imo, but the "well regulated militia" thing is really overplayed by a lot of people when they interpret the meaning of the amendment.  just my .02.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, buddha said:

"well regulated" in the 18th century meant "well organized," it did not refer to government oversight of the militia.

that shouldnt stop the government's ability to regulate the sale and distribution of firearms, imo, but the "well regulated militia" thing is really overplayed by a lot of people when they interpret the meaning of the amendment.  just my .02.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, buddha said:

"well regulated" in the 18th century meant "well organized," it did not refer to government oversight of the militia.

Even by the 18th century definition, a member of the militia who goes out and shoots and kills 6 people at a parade suggests that the militia isn't well organized. But point taken.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, buddha said:

"well regulated" in the 18th century meant "well organized," it did not refer to government oversight of the militia.

that shouldnt stop the government's ability to regulate the sale and distribution of firearms, imo, but the "well regulated militia" thing is really overplayed by a lot of people when they interpret the meaning of the amendment.  just my .02.

Can 330 million people be organized?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are limits to the first amendment.    You can't use speech to plan to kill someone.  If that was protected Charles Manson would never have been in jail.   He never paid anyone to do those killings, he just told people to do it for him.   If his freedom of speech was 100% protected he'd have been innocent right?     You can't tell someone to kill for you.    Freedom of religion - fine, as long as nobody is getting hurt in the process.   If it was total freedom then people like that Jeffs guy could have sex with 10 year olds and nobody could do anything about it.   Religious rituals that include hurting people aren't allowed (some how Scientology gets away with it).    These things are not absolute.     Having military weapons in a civilian setting - there is no place for it.  You don't hunt deer with those fucking things.  You don't need to  protect your house with them.   They're basically for nutjobs and weak, insecure people.   Do you think having an AR-15 could stop the Government if they wanted to get you.  The folks at Ruby Ridge and Waco had loads of weapons, and that was years ago.............Government can send in robots and drones to get you now, they don't even have to get close enough to shoot you.  No AR-15 is gonna stop that.  

We're just a country run by weak, insecure white men and their rhetoric (plus overmedicating people) creates these monsters we have doing this.    I know there are some women that like this shit, but they are in the minority.   Women are mentally stronger than men.  Women are more pragmatic.  Just because they show their emotions more readily doesn't mean their weaker.   We'd be better off if women were running this country.    But nope, this country is still too fucked up to ever allow that.   I know you have outliers like Colin Ferguson, but generally all of these things are done by White men, who all think things should belong to them and when they don't get their way they lash out like this.  

Edited by Motor City Sonics
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, buddha said:

"well regulated" in the 18th century meant "well organized," it did not refer to government oversight of the militia.

that shouldnt stop the government's ability to regulate the sale and distribution of firearms, imo, but the "well regulated militia" thing is really overplayed by a lot of people when they interpret the meaning of the amendment.  just my .02.

What is not overplayed is that the referent of the term “arms” is completely different and it’s some kind  of idiotic stupidity to argue it isn’t. No founder would have any conception of what he given a right to if he walked into a 21st cent gun shop. There is no parallel here to conceptual rights like search. In the 2a a particular thing was an arm and those things have passed from the scene. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All the 4th of July really means to me now is that it's a day off work.   I'm not celebrating this country. It's not worth the effort anymore.  We throw away or burn crops while people starve.  We take rights away from women and minorities and gay people.  Black people are targeted by cops and die over stupid shit like a counterfeit 20 or a air freshener hanging from their mirror.    Just a lot of lies and propaganda.     Ireland is considered one of the safest countries in the world from violent and non-violent crimes.   50 years ago that was not the case at all.   It's when they stopped listening to the lunatic fringe - and stopped with the phony patriotism crap - they turned it around.    I wish I could move there.  

  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said:

What is not overplayed is that the referent of the term “arms” is completely different and it’s some kind  of idiotic stupidity to argue it isn’t. No founder would have any conception of what he given a right to if he walked into a 21st cent gun shop. There is no parallel here to conceptual rights like search. In the 2a a particular thing was an arm and those things have passed from the scene. 

well, the opinion does say that states may regulate all kinds of firearms and the decision is not a blank check to allow people to buy things like bazookas.  in fact, there have been decisions post heller that allowed regulations forbidding the sale or ownership of some firearms (a decision that came out of...wait for it....highland park, illinois).

i still think heller and its progeny are a real stretch.  they go through a lot of hoops to justify their opinion that the 2A means that you have a right to self defense with a gun.  that said, i do think the original meaning was that the government shouldnt be allowed to confiscate people's personal guns.

but as you always say, that was a much different world than we live in now.  i think the results of this decision are being overblown a bit, but i definitely disagree with it and if we lived in a functioning governmental world (and had a more trusting populace) the 2A would be amended to clarify what the majority of the population actually wants.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Motown Bombers said:

Oh great, the people that told us we were overreacting and that Roe would never be overturned are now telling us that this latest decision is being overblown. 

lol. you can use my name and dont have to refer to me as "the people."

i prefer "emperor" if you must use a title.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The United States did not have a professional standing army in 1791. At best the military could be akin to the National Guard. Basically any able bodied free white male could be conscripted into service by way of a local draft if necessary (they could also buy their way out as many did in the Civil War). A constant standing army wasn't around until the early 1800's.

Well regulated militia basically meant that the volunteers needed to be ready in case there was a need. To be in fighting shape. Once the US established a regular full time militia the term basically became moot, imo.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...