Is there anyone here that believes the founders wrote the 2nd Amendment so that America would be the shooting gallery it is today?

[RF667799]

That is not a Mass Shooting in the modern sense of the term nor is it one in any sense. That is a policing action. Nice try though...

Name a Mass Shooting pre-colt with one shooter massacring innocent civilians... I expect another dumb response. Don't let me down.

There was a mass of people shot.

I expected you would further qualify your question once it was factually answered, and I wasn't disappointed.

Next time try to think further ahead.

 

[j brown's body]

SCOTUS opinion. Read the dissent of Heller. One vote made Heller.

Is that when they invented gun ownership as an individual right?

 

[Bodi]

There was a mass of people shot.

I expected you would further qualify your question once it was factually answered, and I wasn't disappointed.

Next time try to think further ahead.

Knowing you would take the term out of context and apply a non-Mass Shooting incident like a war or police action was thinking ahead.

Maybe you should try to think further ahead of me instead of thinking I didn't think ahead enough... but that will only result in you not thinking ahead enough again because you didn't already think ahead to this interaction which is already behind where I am in thinking about this.


.

 

[Bodi]

SCOTUS opinion. Read the dissent of Heller. One vote made Heller.

Which is a major reason about the fallibility of SCOTUS.


.

 

[RF667799]

Knowing you would take the term out of context and apply a non-Mass Shooting incident like a war or police action was thinking ahead.

Maybe you should try to think further ahead of me instead of thinking I didn't think ahead enough... but that will only result in you not thinking ahead enough again because you didn't already think ahead to this interaction which is already behind where I am in thinking about this.


.

 

[devildavid]

Why would people who support dictatorships be so keen on taking them away?

The power to affirm our rights. So if you have the right to keep your property and someone cut your throat and takes it well then you don't have that right do you? But should someone try to cut my throat not fill them up with bullets well then I still have my right don't I?

Indeed.

The ideas that individuals don't have any power over anyone else when they were setting up this country over moving away from Kingdom not toward it.

The people are the government. So our power is derived from ourselves duh and weaponry is the way we enforce it.

The ability to own a firearm gives you the ability to use deadly force and maintaining your rights very easily.

Most Americans don’t need guns to have their rights recognized. It is our form of government that gives us power, not the ability to own a firearm. A person without a firearm is equal to one with one in terms of political power and rights in our country. More firearms don’t give an individual more political power or more rights. What enforces our rights is our politcal and justice system, not our ability to own a gun. A gun owner who commits a crime doesn’t have more power to get away with it due to our laws and justice system. We have court hearings and trials, not duels, to decide disputes. Owning a firearm doesn’t put a person above the law. We are a nation of laws, not men. Deadly force is not what ensures our rights at all, it is the institutions of government that we have created that provide a non violent means to settle disputes. The owners of firearms don’t have more rights than those who don’t own them and all rights are equally protected under the laws of nation. This system works due to social and political cooperation and collaboration, not the ability to use a weapon against someone. Having a firearm or no doesn’t make one bit of difference as far as what rights we have.

 

[rahl]

Name one Mass Shooting pre-Sam Colt.

.

Boston massacre

 

[devildavid]

Except for all the overwhelming evidence you're pretending doesn't exist.

There is absolutely no evidence linking gun laws as a motivation for mass shootings at all. You want this to be true to fit your preconceived notion and fulfill your confirmation bias.

 

[rahl]

SCOTUS made a decision on the comma?

Yes

 

[rahl]

SCOTUS opinion. Read the dissent of Heller. One vote made Heller.

Dissenting opinions are completely meaningless.

 

[StillBallin75]

I don't particularly care what the Founders thought, my support for gun rights is not dependent on the reasoning of slaveowners.

In fact, I would have argued that the right to fight one's oppressor is justification for inherent gun rights and I would have argued for arming the slaves.

Also interesting how many people can witness the threat of fascism in real time and somehow still not be on board with the right to arm oneself without the government getting in the way.

 

[CLAX1911]

There is absolutely no evidence linking gun laws as a motivation for mass shootings at all.

I didn't say that it was gun laws I said gun control. Mass shooters specifically pick places where it's illegal to defend yourself I pick places where your rights are suspended.

You want this to be true to fit your preconceived notion and fulfill your confirmation bias.

No I don't want your stupid straw man to be true the facts are what they are. Your rights can easily be violated in places where they're suspended.

 

[rahl]

Is that when they invented gun ownership as an individual right?

No. Like every other right enshrined in the constitution, the right to keep and bear arms is an individual right. SCOTUS affirmed the individual right back in 1858. Every single court that has ever looked at it, has concurred.

 

[Fletch]

I don't particularly care what the Founders thought, my support for gun rights is not dependent on the reasoning of slaveowners.

In fact, I would have argued that the right to fight one's oppressor is justification for inherent gun rights and I would have argued for arming the slaves.

Also interesting how many people can witness the threat of fascism in real time and somehow still not be on board with the right to arm oneself without the government getting in the way.

Those are surprisingly good points. And it is odd that people who scream that democracy is under existential threat and see fascists in every shadow, not only wont arm themselves but refuse to defend the right to do so.

 

[CLAX1911]

Most Americans don’t need guns to have their rights

You can't know that because we've always had them. And everywhere else in the world or you're not allowed to have a gun you don't have any rights at all not whatsoever.

recognized. It is our form of government that gives us power,

No it's not it's us that gives the government power you've got this old backwards

not the ability to own a firearm. A person without a firearm is equal to one with one in terms of political power and rights in our country.

So if someone walks up and blows the brains out of the person without a farm how do they have the right to live when they're dead? The government absolutely does **** all to stop this.

More firearms don’t give an individual more political power or more rights.

Then why ban them?

What enforces our rights is our politcal and justice system,

Come back to the people who were slaves.

not our ability to own a gun. A gun owner who commits a crime doesn’t have more power to get away with it due to our laws and justice system.

Bringing a murderer to Justice doesn't bring you back to life so that's not irrelevant point

We have court hearings and trials, not duels, to decide disputes.

Well next time someone shoots you and steals your car tell them wait till we have a court to dispute whether or not you just get to have my car.

Owning a firearm doesn’t put a person above the law.

Nobody that owns a gun thinks that it does.

We are a nation of laws, not men.

Seig hail mine führer

Deadly force is not what ensures our rights at all,

So if somebody cuts your throat and you bleed out you'll just magically pop back into life because it was illegal?

it is the institutions of government that we have created that provide a non violent means to settle disputes.

So if someone comes up and cuts your throat and you bleed out they'll scoop up your courts and take it to the court you'll just magically resurrect?

The owners of firearms don’t have more rights than those who don’t own them and all rights are equally protected under the laws of nation.

Nobody said they have more rights they have more ability to defend those rights.

This system works due to social and political cooperation and collaboration,

The system doesn't work if it did there would be no murders.

not the ability to use a weapon against someone. Having a firearm or no doesn’t make one bit of difference as far as what rights we have.

Yeah it makes a difference to how well you can keep those rats say you have the right to live if someone comes and sticks a knife in your heart what good is that right going to do you does the knife somehow magically deflect because you have the right?

You're asking me to trust a system that is an absolutely broken and you refuse to fix

It's not because you want to save lives or promote civility it's because you want power.

 

[CLAX1911]

Is that when they invented gun ownership as an individual right?

In 1792 no the Heller decision was much later to undo KKK laws

 

[devildavid]

I didn't say that it was gun laws I said gun control. Mass shooters specifically pick places where it's illegal to defend yourself I pick places where your rights are suspended.

No I don't want your stupid straw man to be true the facts are what they are. Your rights can easily be violated in places where they're suspended.

Gun control laws don’t attract mass shooters to specifically target those areas that have them. That is not the part of the motivation of mass shooters nor is there any evidence to back this up at all. Mass shooters targets and methods are varied and often due to mental illness. Has nothing at all to do with purposely seeking out areas with gun control.

My rights are never suspended anywhere, so I am good, thanks. Rights can actually be violated anywhere, even where everyone owns a firearm. It isn’t firearms that prevent any rights from ever being violated. It is when people decide to violate the law. One person with a gun can shoot another person with a gun if they decide to break the law.

 

[devildavid]

You can't know that because we've always had them. And everywhere else in the world or you're not allowed to have a gun you don't have any rights at all not whatsoever.

No it's not it's us that gives the government power you've got this old backwards

So if someone walks up and blows the brains out of the person without a farm how do they have the right to live when they're dead? The government absolutely does **** all to stop this.

Then why ban them?

Come back to the people who were slaves.

Bringing a murderer to Justice doesn't bring you back to life so that's not irrelevant point

Well next time someone shoots you and steals your car tell them wait till we have a court to dispute whether or not you just get to have my car.

Nobody that owns a gun thinks that it does.

Seig hail mine führer

So if somebody cuts your throat and you bleed out you'll just magically pop back into life because it was illegal?

So if someone comes up and cuts your throat and you bleed out they'll scoop up your courts and take it to the court you'll just magically resurrect?

Nobody said they have more rights they have more ability to defend those rights.

The system doesn't work if it did there would be no murders.

Yeah it makes a difference to how well you can keep those rats say you have the right to live if someone comes and sticks a knife in your heart what good is that right going to do you does the knife somehow magically deflect because you have the right?

You're asking me to trust a system that is an absolutely broken and you refuse to fix

It's not because you want to save lives or promote civility it's because you want power.

I live in the USA and what you are describing doesn’t come close to my experience. I am sorry that you live somewhere where you are under a constant threat and fear of being physically attacked. Having a weapon won’t change your dangerous environment.

 

[CLAX1911]

Gun control laws don’t attract mass shooters to specifically target those areas that have them.

Yeah the lack of obstacles does. weapons make a target harder.

That is not the part of the motivation of mass shooters nor is there any evidence to back this up at all.

Then list all the mass shootings that happen in gun stores, hunting shops gun shows and shooting ranges.

Mass shooters targets and methods are varied and often due to mental illness.

Yeah and they pick soft targets

Has nothing at all to do with purposely seeking out areas with gun control.

Then why do they mostly take place in areas with strict gun control?

My rights are never suspended anywhere,

So if sometime murders you you simply didn't have the right to live anymore

so I am good, thanks.

To all the people having guns that make the risk of attacking you to high for most people.

You're welcome.

Rights can actually be violated anywhere,

So you should have no power to stop it? Sounds like a police state to me.

even where everyone owns a firearm. It isn’t firearms that prevent any rights from ever being violated.

So if somebody was going to rob me and I fire a slug into their skull they are still going to rob me? How?

It is when people decide to violate the law.

Which anybody can do at any time with no effort at all. Laws cannot protect you they are just words written down in a building somewhere

One person with a gun can shoot another person with a gun if they decide to break the law.

So what would be the point in making sure only the one that would shoot unprovoked has the gun?

 

[rahl]

Most Americans don’t need guns to have their rights recognized.

The beautiful thing about this country, is that you don’t get a say in what anyone else needs or wants.

It is our form of government that gives us power, not the ability to own a firearm. A person without a firearm is equal to one with one in terms of political power and rights in our country. More firearms don’t give an individual more political power or more rights. What enforces our rights is our politcal and justice system, not our ability to own a gun. A gun owner who commits a crime doesn’t have more power to get away with it due to our laws and justice system. We have court hearings and trials, not duels, to decide disputes. Owning a firearm doesn’t put a person above the law. We are a nation of laws, not men. Deadly force is not what ensures our rights at all, it is the institutions of government that we have created that provide a non violent means to settle disputes. The owners of firearms don’t have more rights than those who don’t own them and all rights are equally protected under the laws of nation. This system works due to social and political cooperation and collaboration, not the ability to use a weapon against someone. Having a firearm or no doesn’t make one bit of difference as far as what rights we have.

 

[Spock]

Is that when they invented gun ownership as an individual right?

Actually, yes. Prior to that it was viewed as a right to form a militia.

 

[Spock]

Most Americans don’t need guns to have their rights recognized. It is our form of government that gives us power, not the ability to own a firearm. A person without a firearm is equal to one with one in terms of political power and rights in our country. More firearms don’t give an individual more political power or more rights. What enforces our rights is our politcal and justice system, not our ability to own a gun. A gun owner who commits a crime doesn’t have more power to get away with it due to our laws and justice system. We have court hearings and trials, not duels, to decide disputes. Owning a firearm doesn’t put a person above the law. We are a nation of laws, not men. Deadly force is not what ensures our rights at all, it is the institutions of government that we have created that provide a non violent means to settle disputes. The owners of firearms don’t have more rights than those who don’t own them and all rights are equally protected under the laws of nation. This system works due to social and political cooperation and collaboration, not the ability to use a weapon against someone. Having a firearm or no doesn’t make one bit of difference as far as what rights we have.

Firearm addicts have developed a series of fantasies about being able to have easily portable lethal power to use against humans. That has produced mythology about defending a home or use of a firearm for self-defense. Those misconceptions serve to drive the pro-gun agenda. inflame the ignorant, and control the political process.

 

[CLAX1911]

I live in the USA and what you are describing doesn’t come close to my experience.

If nobody was allowed to legally own guns that would change.

I am sorry that you live somewhere where you are under a constant threat and fear of being physically attacked.

Everybody is, it's just that I didn't need to deny it for my ideology to work

Having a weapon won’t change your dangerous environment.

No but weapons have uses that's why humans have made them since Mesopotamia.

 

[CLAX1911]

Firearm addicts have developed a series of fantasies about being able to have easily portable lethal power to use against humans.

That's all humans throughout existence.

That has produced mythology about defending a home or use of a firearm for self-defense.

If you don't think it's possible come try.

Those misconceptions serve to drive the pro-gun agenda.

Aww poor little spock can't have his dictatorship

inflame the ignorant, and control the political process.

Works.

 

[RF667799]

Firearm addicts have developed a series of fantasies about being able to have easily portable lethal power to use against humans. That has produced mythology about defending a home or use of a firearm for self-defense. Those misconceptions serve to drive the pro-gun agenda. inflame the ignorant, and control the political process.

Fantasies? I do have easily portable lethal power that can be used against humans. Reality.

It's called a motor vehicle.