How can anyone believe in gun control?

[TurtleDude]

If all "assault weapons" magically disappeared overnight crime wouldn't change a bit.

what's really funny is watching members of the BM pretend its about public safety

 

[Crimefree]

Small Arms from 1950 to 1959

Think again.

Do that

Smith & Wesson SW Model 29 (.44 Magnum) Six-Shot Revolver
Colt Python Six-Shot Revolver
Remington Model 870 Wingmaster Manually-Actuated, Pump-Action Slide Shotgun
ArmaLite AR-10 Battle Rifle
ArmaLite / Colt AR-15 Select-Fire Automatic Rifle
While the Colt M16 service rifle originated with the ArmaLite / Colt AR-15
Springfield M14 Automatic Service Rifle / Battle Rifle
The Springfield M14 automatic rifle grew out of the famous World War 2-era M1 Garand service rifle.

And your point is?

 

[Crimefree]

what's really funny is watching members of the BM pretend its about public safety

There are many millions of ignorant people ready and waiting for somebody to tell them how to be safe from crime. Why the heck do firearm organisations allow gun control to do this without opposition?

 

[Crimefree]

what's really funny is watching members of the BM pretend its about public safety

There are many millions of ignorant people ready and waiting for somebody to tell them how to be safe from crime. Why the heck do firearm organisations allow gun control to do this without opposition?

 

[Crimefree]

I don't think its that hard to understand, even though I disagree. "It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it."

I used to be VERY anti-gun, I hated the fact that they even existed, I hated everyone involved in their creation. The idea that people could own a thing that they could just point at me and I'm gone was abhorrent to me. Witnessing a murder as a child cemented this fear of and hatred of guns.

It took decades and having a gun owning roommate to change my perception of them. Before I graduated college I cared little about the 2nd Amendment or what it safeguards, I just wanted to keep having a good time and the idea of guns making things safer would have been counter intuitive for me.

Although my values have changed, I still understand the revoltion some have towards guns. I even used to look down on hunters, ignorance can do that to you.

It takes a big man to admit when they have been wrong.

Invariably all gun control advocates are no different to your experience. It is fear and hatred that drives them, inculcated by gun controls emotional arguments splattered with blood and dead children.

 

[Crimefree]

the two main purposes of gun control are to

1) allow criminal loving politicians to pander to the low intellect sheeple without hurting criminals

2) to disarm people who don't vote for them

3 Power and control. Disarmed people cannot object or toss out governments who don't need a vote. Loyal subjects

 

[Enlighten Me]

The vast majority of NRA members support gun control. It is always best to hit the target you are shooting at. (Sarcasm/Humor??)

Isn't it within the jurisdiction of ATF and or the President executive order to simply designate certain weapons such as large capacity magazines to require the same license you need to own a 50 cal machine gun or tank? Higher vetting. Increased cost to obtain the license.

I cared little about the 2nd Amendment or what it safeguards

OK, what 'safeguard' did the founding fathers have in mind when they created the 2nd Amendment? It wasn't the right to protect yourself. It wasn't to overthrow the government they just created. It wasn't to keep the government from confiscating their guns. Much of the propaganda we hear here and elsewhere has been manufactured long after the Founding Fathers have died.

I thought it had a lot to do with the fact that there was NO standing milita at the time and that was WHY they created the 2nd Amendment. To have a militia to protect the country from external threats.

How did that get transformed and morphed into a propaganda campaign that makes our government a threat. To give gun owners a right to overthrow the government by force? The whole idea just doesn't make sense.

 

[TurtleDude]

The vast majority of NRA members support gun control. It is always best to hit the target you are shooting at. (Sarcasm/Humor??)

Isn't it within the jurisdiction of ATF and or the President executive order to simply designate certain weapons such as large capacity magazines to require the same license you need to own a 50 cal machine gun or tank? Higher vetting. Increased cost to obtain the license.



OK, what 'safeguard' did the founding fathers have in mind when they created the 2nd Amendment? It wasn't the right to protect yourself. It wasn't to overthrow the government they just created. It wasn't to keep the government from confiscating their guns. Much of the propaganda we hear here and elsewhere has been manufactured long after the Founding Fathers have died.

I thought it had a lot to do with the fact that there was NO standing milita at the time and that was WHY they created the 2nd Amendment. To have a militia to protect the country from external threats.

How did that get transformed and morphed into a propaganda campaign that makes our government a threat. To give gun owners a right to overthrow the government by force? The whole idea just doesn't make sense.

interesting revisionist history but the most revisionist was that when the constitution was written and ratified and the new government was created-no one seriously believed that the federal government was given any power whatsoever to regulate privately owned arms

 

[Rucker61]

The vast majority of NRA members support gun control. It is always best to hit the target you are shooting at. (Sarcasm/Humor??)

Isn't it within the jurisdiction of ATF and or the President executive order to simply designate certain weapons such as large capacity magazines to require the same license you need to own a 50 cal machine gun or tank? Higher vetting. Increased cost to obtain the license.

Wouldn't that be changing a law, which requires Congress rather than the Executive Branch?

 

[Crimefree]

interesting revisionist history but the most revisionist was that when the constitution was written and ratified and the new government was created-no one seriously believed that the federal government was given any power whatsoever to regulate privately owned arms

Apparently "shall not be infringed" means something different today. What no gun control advocate will say. They quote others instead and give their backing to people totally out of context or some convoluted thinking based on utter rubbish.

 

[Crimefree]

The vast majority of NRA members support gun control. It is always best to hit the target you are shooting at. (Sarcasm/Humor??)

Isn't it within the jurisdiction of ATF and or the President executive order to simply designate certain weapons such as large capacity magazines to require the same license you need to own a 50 cal machine gun or tank? Higher vetting. Increased cost to obtain the license.



OK, what 'safeguard' did the founding fathers have in mind when they created the 2nd Amendment? It wasn't the right to protect yourself. It wasn't to overthrow the government they just created. It wasn't to keep the government from confiscating their guns. Much of the propaganda we hear here and elsewhere has been manufactured long after the Founding Fathers have died.

I thought it had a lot to do with the fact that there was NO standing milita at the time and that was WHY they created the 2nd Amendment. To have a militia to protect the country from external threats.

How did that get transformed and morphed into a propaganda campaign that makes our government a threat. To give gun owners a right to overthrow the government by force? The whole idea just doesn't make sense.

You are assuming the founding fathers had a singular purpose which is not true

Part of the answer may be found in the Declaration of independence. The rest are enumerated in the fedralst papers. This amendment was not created in a vacuum and many weighed in on the subject. A little research will help you.

A good place to start or end. Gives an extensive view of the available evidence.
GunCite-Second Amendment-Original intent and purpose of the Second Amendment

 

[blackjack50]

The vast majority of NRA members support gun control. It is always best to hit the target you are shooting at. (Sarcasm/Humor??)

Isn't it within the jurisdiction of ATF and or the President executive order to simply designate certain weapons such as large capacity magazines to require the same license you need to own a 50 cal machine gun or tank? Higher vetting. Increased cost to obtain the license.



OK, what 'safeguard' did the founding fathers have in mind when they created the 2nd Amendment? It wasn't the right to protect yourself. It wasn't to overthrow the government they just created. It wasn't to keep the government from confiscating their guns. Much of the propaganda we hear here and elsewhere has been manufactured long after the Founding Fathers have died.

I thought it had a lot to do with the fact that there was NO standing milita at the time and that was WHY they created the 2nd Amendment. To have a militia to protect the country from external threats.

How did that get transformed and morphed into a propaganda campaign that makes our government a threat. To give gun owners a right to overthrow the government by force? The whole idea just doesn't make sense.

"The right of the people to keep and bear arms."

That all comes together in the amendment. No comma. No periods. None. It was always about the individual right to own arms. And the founders were aware of he need of the individual to protect themselves from all manner of threat. Not just governments.

Yes. The militia was important. And the founders saw why. But do you believe the founders were unaware of how important arms were to the individual? Why else would they give the right to the individual? They didn't give it to the subset militia. They gave it to ALL people.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[SlamJammington]

Statistics why Gun Control doesn't work, sorted and gathered by me, with information taken from Guns in Honduras ? Firearms, gun law and gun control

U.S.: 101.5 Guns per 100 citizens (Highest in world), 10.54 gun deaths per 100,000 people (11th in world), Full Auto: Subject to federal licensing and registration, Semi Auto (Including handguns): Permitted without licence in most states, Rifle/Shotguns in general: Regulated by law, Open carry: Permitted without licence in most states, Concealed Carry: Dependent on state, usually allowed with permit

Now, lets look at
Honduras: 9.9-11.24 guns per 100 citizens (88th highest in world), 68 gun deaths per 100,000 people (Highest in world), Full Auto: Prohibited, Semi Auto (including handguns): Licence, Rifle/Shotguns in general: Regulated by law, Open Carry: Prohibited, Concealed Carry: Required permit

 

[Cigar]

Seriously, I just don't understand. Now the only caveat for me are WMDs. It seems to work to keep them out of the hands of criminals.

Bur for anything else, gun control just means keeping them out of the hands of law abiding people. Black markets work. Sniper rifles, fully automatic weapons, silencers, etc. can be obtained on the black market, which is where criminals will buy them.

Gun free zones are gun free only for law abiding people. Utah, the only state in the country where concealed weapons are allowed in all public schools, has never had a mass school shooting. There seems to be a pretty strong correlation here between allowing guns in schools and not having mass school shootings.

I don't get not letting former felons have guns. They served their time. If they aren't safe to be released into the general population, than they shouldn't be released. If they are safe to be released, than they should be able to legally get guns.

Gun Control = Don't put your finger on the trigger until you're ready to shoot.

 

[SlamJammington]

People who don't understand guns should not argue for gun control. If you think the "AR" in AR-15 stands for "Assault Rifle", you need to start researching and learning before you start arguing.

 

[TurtleDude]

People who don't understand guns should not argue for gun control. If you think the "AR" in AR-15 stands for "Assault Rifle", you need to start researching and learning before you start arguing.

If you think that "assault" when applied to a rifle means a violation of the penal code then you really are too stupid to be arguing about guns. But the main reason for the VPC to push the term "assault weapon" was hoping stupid or uneducated people would think that the term "assault" when applied to "weapons" was somehow a criminal purpose when in reality "assault" when used in a military context requires fully automatic rifles to suppress fire from defenders of a position that attacking infantry is trying to overcome

 

[cabse5]

Seriously, I just don't understand. Now the only caveat for me are WMDs. It seems to work to keep them out of the hands of criminals.

Bur for anything else, gun control just means keeping them out of the hands of law abiding people. Black markets work. Sniper rifles, fully automatic weapons, silencers, etc. can be obtained on the black market, which is where criminals will buy them.

Gun free zones are gun free only for law abiding people. Utah, the only state in the country where concealed weapons are allowed in all public schools, has never had a mass school shooting. There seems to be a pretty strong correlation here between allowing guns in schools and not having mass school shootings.

I don't get not letting former felons have guns. They served their time. If they aren't safe to be released into the general population, than they shouldn't be released. If they are safe to be released, than they should be able to legally get guns.

OP, I acknowledge your ideology. Unfortunately, not every gun owner is responsible with their weapon. Like, for instance, the man who shot a texting man in a movie theatre. Florida Judge Denies ‘Stand Your Ground’ Defense in Movie Theater Shooting | KTLA

The second amendment of The Constitution wasn't meant to give everyone the right to bear arms. That right, as originally passed in 1789, was given to state militias.

The Shay's Rebellion in 1787? was a rebellion of farmers protesting high state and local taxes gathered to ease the burden of each state's debt incurred by the Revolutionary War. The economic climate was depressed and farmers also stood to lose their farms and go to debtor's prisons.
Daniel Shays of which the rebellion was named, was a former officer in the Continental Army. Former continental soldiers, some who were farmers after the Revolutionary War, supplied their arms in Shay's Rebellion.

Sidenote: The Whiskey Rebellion of 1791 occurred after The Constitution and the second amendment were written. It was a rebellion against federal taxes (whiskey production taxes) to help pay for debt created by the War Of Independence. Protestors marched against Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. It, like Shay's Rebellion, had some former continental soldiers involved in the march and all their arms came from former Continental Army soldiers.

First, states were appalled that opposition could so easily be armed in the Shay's Rebellion and second, the federal government was appalled that opposition could so easily be armed in the Whiskey Rebellion.
So much so that the original proposal submitted by Madison for the second amendment was changed before passage by the first congress to be 'the right for a state's well regulated militia comprised of people to keep and bear arms'.

And, of course, the US has a standing army, now, so keeping state militias well stocked with arms isn't pertinent.

 

[calamity]

How can anyone believe in gun control?

Maybe they met a gun rights supporter.

 

[TurtleDude]

It's the cops that cause collateral damage.

Why do you use the word "need"?

because he doesn't have a legitimate argument against our rights

 

[TurtleDude]

How can anyone believe in gun control?

Maybe they met a gun rights supporter.

thanks for admitting how specious and stupid your current jihad against gun rights is. Its not about controlling crime, its not about public safety, its about your butt hurt disgust with pro gun advocates who you pretend or believe don't support you on issues near and dear to your current caricature

 

[TurtleDude]

OP, I acknowledge your ideology. Unfortunately, not every gun owner is responsible with their weapon. Like, for instance, the man who shot a texting man in a movie theatre. Florida Judge Denies ‘Stand Your Ground’ Defense in Movie Theater Shooting | KTLA

The second amendment of The Constitution wasn't meant to give everyone the right to bear arms. That right, as originally passed in 1789, was given to state militias.

The Shay's Rebellion in 1787? was a rebellion of farmers protesting high state and local taxes gathered to ease the burden of each state's debt incurred by the Revolutionary War. The economic climate was depressed and farmers also stood to lose their farms and go to debtor's prisons.
Daniel Shays of which the rebellion was named, was a former officer in the Continental Army. Former continental soldiers, some who were farmers in peacetime, supplied their arms in Shay's Rebellion.

Sidenote: The Whiskey Rebellion of 1791 occurred after The Constitution and the second amendment were written. It was a rebellion against federal taxes (whiskey production taxes) to help pay for debt created by the War Of Independence. Protestors marched against Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. It, like Shay's Rebellion, had some former continental soldiers involved in the march and all their arms came from former Continental Army soldiers.

First, states were appalled that opposition could so easily be armed in the Shay's Rebellion and second, the federal government was appalled that opposition could so easily be armed in the Whiskey Rebellion.
So much so that the original proposal submitted by Madison for the second amendment was changed before passage by the first congress to be 'the right for a state's well regulated militia comprised of people to keep and bear arms'.

so many errors in that statement of yours

the second amendment was not intended to GIVE anything: rather it was a blanket prohibition upon a federal government to act in an area it had no power to act in in the first place-that being to regulate or restrict the pre-existing right of free citizens to own, bear, keep and possess firearms

 

[calamity]

thanks for admitting how specious and stupid your current jihad against gun rights is. Its not about controlling crime, its not about public safety, its about your butt hurt disgust with pro gun advocates who you pretend or believe don't support you on issues near and dear to your current caricature

No. It's that some, perhaps even most, are a bit off their rocker and do a heck of a job, Brownie, convincing the otherwise neutral person that maybe there really ought to be some gun controls after all.

 

[Rucker61]

OP, I acknowledge your ideology. Unfortunately, not every gun owner is responsible with their weapon. Like, for instance, the man who shot a texting man in a movie theatre. Florida Judge Denies ‘Stand Your Ground’ Defense in Movie Theater Shooting | KTLA

The second amendment of The Constitution wasn't meant to give everyone the right to bear arms. That right, as originally passed in 1789, was given to state militias.

The Shay's Rebellion in 1787? was a rebellion of farmers protesting high state and local taxes gathered to ease the burden of each state's debt incurred by the Revolutionary War. The economic climate was depressed and farmers also stood to lose their farms and go to debtor's prisons.
Daniel Shays of which the rebellion was named, was a former officer in the Continental Army. Former continental soldiers, some who were farmers after the Revolutionary War, supplied their arms in Shay's Rebellion.

Sidenote: The Whiskey Rebellion of 1791 occurred after The Constitution and the second amendment were written. It was a rebellion against federal taxes (whiskey production taxes) to help pay for debt created by the War Of Independence. Protestors marched against Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. It, like Shay's Rebellion, had some former continental soldiers involved in the march and all their arms came from former Continental Army soldiers.

Yet no laws were ever passed that prohibited the ownership of firearms by citizens not associated with a militia. The Militia Acts of 1792 and 1796 were all written after both rebellions, and no was was prohibited from owning a firearm by any of the laws. The Federalists under Adams actually tossed out the 1st Amendment, yet didn't take the opportunity to toss the Second.

There is not and has never been a requirement to be in a militia to have the right to keep and bear arms.

 

[Rucker61]

No. It's that some, perhaps even most, are a bit off their rocker and do a heck of a job, Brownie, convincing the otherwise (mythical) neutral person that maybe there really ought to be some gun controls after all.

Fixed it for you.

 

[cabse5]

Yet no laws were ever passed that prohibited the ownership of firearms by citizens not associated with a militia. The Militia Acts of 1792 and 1796 were all written after both rebellions, and no was was prohibited from owning a firearm by any of the laws. The Federalists under Adams actually tossed out the 1st Amendment, yet didn't take the opportunity to toss the Second.

There is not and has never been a requirement to be in a militia to have the right to keep and bear arms.

Your argument is no federal law was ever put into place to prevent arms from getting into the hands of non-militia.

'Allowing' free ownership of arms was the goal (was Madison's goal) of the second amendment but was not the iron-clad rule. Certain situations caused the federal government to restrict arms ownership. Like the Shay's Rebellion. Like the Whiskey Rebellion. I believe 'solving' the chaos in inner-city Chicago would have been another. Certainly, the federal government would need a great reason to restrict arms ownership and the restriction would be temporary.