Can we have a rational discussion about guns and why the typical arguments for gun control and its implementation won't work?

[TankTop5]

Please take a few minutes and read this. You may not agree but these writings are the intent of the 2nd Amendment, many believe they are timeless.

Gun Quotations of the Founding Fathers | Buckeye Firearms Association

Who knows better what the Second Amendment means than the Founding Fathers? Here are some powerful gun quotations from the Founding Fathers themselves. If you know of a gun quotation from a Founding Father not listed here, send it to us. (But make SURE it's not already listed. Okay?) Back to the...

www.buckeyefirearms.org

 

[GO-NAD!]

First, yes the US Army is unconstitutional but so are a lot of things. The purpose of individuals being armed was so that we could raise militias and an army if needed. What would you like them armed with, muskets, that’s willful ignorance!

The bake sale reference was to illustrate how the people came together to provide the country with military equipment.

So, are you suggesting that the standing army should be disbanded and all of the cutting edge weaponry - much of it requiring a great deal of training - should be held in private hands? Then, when all of the Latin American countries decide to band together and invade, you just call for a time out so that you can train your gaggle of Walter Mittys to operate all of this gear and repel the invasion.

Alrighty then.

 

[Trell]

So, are you suggesting that the standing army should be disbanded and all of the cutting edge weaponry - much of it requiring a great deal of training - should be held in private hands? Then, when all of the Latin American countries decide to band together and invade, you just call for a time out so that you can train your gaggle of Walter Mittys to operate all of this gear and repel the invasion.

Alrighty then.

He has some nukes he can lob at them if they try to breach the Wall!

 

[Trell]

So the army is unconstitutional and you owning a nuclear device is how we should be handling national security?

I would feel so much safer!

 

[GO-NAD!]

Please take a few minutes and read this. You may not agree but these writings are the intent of the 2nd Amendment, many believe they are timeless.

Gun Quotations of the Founding Fathers | Buckeye Firearms Association

Who knows better what the Second Amendment means than the Founding Fathers? Here are some powerful gun quotations from the Founding Fathers themselves. If you know of a gun quotation from a Founding Father not listed here, send it to us. (But make SURE it's not already listed. Okay?) Back to the...

www.buckeyefirearms.org

I read a few, but it became repetitive. A couple of them stand out:

"A free people ought not only to be armed, but disciplined..."
- George Washington, First Annual Address, to both House of Congress, January 8, 1790

Oh well, one out of two ain't bad.

"I prefer dangerous freedom over peaceful slavery."
- Thomas Jefferson, letter to James Madison, January 30, 1787

Oh, the irony...

 

[Irvrobinson]

We’re both right, Congress has the power to raise an army but only for two years. Again America was never intended to maintain a standing army, only a Navy. Citizens are the defense force of the United States Constitutionally and that means we are supposed to have military grade weapons. The Brits had it right during WWII, individual towns had bake sales and fundraisers to buy Spitfires for Great Britain.

No, we're not both right. The federal army is not unconstitutional, and has never been. The Army Clause limited individual appropriations for two years, so that Congress would be forced to reconsider military appropriations every two years.

 

[Irvrobinson]

Please take a few minutes and read this. You may not agree but these writings are the intent of the 2nd Amendment, many believe they are timeless.

Gun Quotations of the Founding Fathers | Buckeye Firearms Association

Who knows better what the Second Amendment means than the Founding Fathers? Here are some powerful gun quotations from the Founding Fathers themselves. If you know of a gun quotation from a Founding Father not listed here, send it to us. (But make SURE it's not already listed. Okay?) Back to the...

www.buckeyefirearms.org

I don't care what the founders said, I only care about what was put in the Constitution. These were a bunch of slaveholding, bigoted, religious men, who among other things thought the US was created just for Christians. (Such supporters of religious freedom! Not.) They made women second class citizens. They codified slavery into the Constitution. Many of them had a states-rights vision for the United States that looks more like the EU than it does a country. I don't care about "times being different", these were mostly nasty men, and somehow over time a nation managed to evolve out of their stupid ideas, though it took a civil war to accomplish a lot of that nation building. Every time I see one of these posts quoting the founders like they were prescient gods it makes me nauseous.

 

[TankTop5]

So, are you suggesting that the standing army should be disbanded and all of the cutting edge weaponry - much of it requiring a great deal of training - should be held in private hands? Then, when all of the Latin American countries decide to band together and invade, you just call for a time out so that you can train your gaggle of Walter Mittys to operate all of this gear and repel the invasion.

Alrighty then.

I’m not suggesting anything of the sort, Pandora was released from her box at the close of WWII... I would like to drastically reduce the size and scope of the US military but it’s elimination at this point is impossible.

Do we really need 200,000 soldiers deployed to over 150 countries all the time?

It’s been said that if Russia invaded Los Angeles it would be a tough fight but LAPD would win within a couple days.

Mexico invade the US? LOL, are you stoned this early in the day.

 

[Irvrobinson]

That's an indirect way of saying that there are two equally valid points of view, hence the controversy. I don't believe that at all.

The 2nd Amendment was primarily about a 'well regulated Militia'. It openly said so. This was the commonly accepted view throughout US history, as established and supported by repeated court rulings. This was changed in 2008 by the US Supreme Court, as led by justices who claimed to be 'strict constructionists'. To claim that a 'well regulated Militia' has nothing to do with the 2nd Amendment requires a radical reconstruction of the 2nd Amendment.

It was only the NRA's wishful thinking combined with intense political lobbying since the late 1970s that brought on this controversy.

I didn't say that a well-regulated Militia had nothing to do with the 2nd Amendment. I said that the right of the people to bear arms has nothing to do with a militia. Also in typical constitutional form, the amendment adds a clear limitation on federal government power, "shall not be infringed", that is typical in every other amendment in The Bill of Rights, and it always directed at individual human rights, not the rights of a government entity (a militia).

While I am a supporter of gun control, I am also not in favor of supporting the innovative interpretation of the Constitution to suit personal agendas. Your position continues to be wishful thinking.

 

[highfigh]

Denzel

Denzel huh? I guess that settles it. “You mean you don’t want him to shut up and act?”

I'm not sure I have written anything like "shut up and act" about anyone. He's someone who has said things that make sense, to me- do you disagree with his comments? Show your disagreement, don't just make jabs and run.

I started this thread in order to find out if we have level-headed ideas about how this might be addressed- your comments are as welcome as everyone else'. What are your thoughts?

 

[highfigh]

I’m not suggesting anything of the sort, Pandora was released from her box at the close of WWII... I would like to drastically reduce the size and scope of the US military but it’s elimination at this point is impossible.

Do we really need 200,000 soldiers deployed to over 150 countries all the time?

It’s been said that if Russia invaded Los Angeles it would be a tough fight but LAPD would win within a couple days.

Mexico invade the US? LOL, are you stoned this early in the day.

Wars can be fought on more levels than by using a military.

LAPD doesn't have heavy artillery and the size of the invasion would determine the outcome, but anyone who plans to invade a foreign place can learn all they want about the layout very quickly, now that maps in three dimensions are available online. The advantage of local knowledge of the place is gone. Guerrilla warfare would still play a major part, though.

The US is similar to the rich uncle who would go to help out in a fight- we have a lot of resources, so people ask for them, similar to a lottery winner who receives requests form friends, family and people they had never met.

This thread isn't about a military invasion- it's about civilians killing civilians on a daily basis, for no good reason.

 

[GO-NAD!]

I’m not suggesting anything of the sort, Pandora was released from her box at the close of WWII... I would like to drastically reduce the size and scope of the US military but it’s elimination at this point is impossible.

Well, it was implied by your comment that the standing army was unconstitutional.

Do we really need 200,000 soldiers deployed to over 150 countries all the time?

Nope.

It’s been said that if Russia invaded Los Angeles it would be a tough fight but LAPD would win within a couple days.

It may have been said, but it's definitely wrong.

Mexico invade the US? LOL, are you stoned this early in the day.

I said Latin American countries, not Mexico. If you had no standing army, who would repel the invasion? And, no I'm not stoned.

 

[highfigh]

He has some nukes he can lob at them if they try to breach the Wall!

People are driving & walking through gaps in the wall now- why would they need to breach it?

 

[TankTop5]

I don't care what the founders said, I only care about what was put in the Constitution. These were a bunch of slaveholding, bigoted, religious men, who among other things thought the US was created just for Christians. (Such supporters of religious freedom! Not.) They made women second class citizens. They codified slavery into the Constitution. Many of them had a states-rights vision for the United States that looks more like the EU than it does a country. I don't care about "times being different", these were mostly nasty men, and somehow over time a nation managed to evolve out of their stupid ideas, though it took a civil war to accomplish a lot of that nation building. Every time I see one of these posts quoting the founders like they were prescient gods makes me nauseous.

If I shoot someone in self defense I will be tried (or not) based on the information I had at the time, not information later gathered that I didn’t know at the time. Your argument about the Founding Fathers is comparing today’s morals and standards to those of the time. The topic is too broad to take on in this forum but in short they did not want slavery but America would never have existed if they had apposed it at that time. They wrote many letters discussing how to end slavery, sadly they didn’t live to see it happen.

Anyway, you are simply grandstanding! What have you done to free someone from slavery, actual slavery? If you’d like to PM me I can discuss it privately but organizations I support actively free the oppressed and hunt the oppressors in America and around the globe, some of whom marched with MLK, I wasn’t born yet. A little girl in Vietnam was recently raped, burned alive and had her hands and feet cutoff. She survived and is being well taken care of, and is in extremely good spirits. Her oppressor was given the opportunity to accept the Lord Jesus Christ before...

Anyway, to those who think citizens don’t need guns because of current political systems and opulence, I hope you’re right. Sadly the whole of human history does not agree with your opinions.

 

[TankTop5]

It may have been said, but it's definitely wrong.

Russia doesn’t have enough ships or troop carrying aircraft to oppose LAPD. Red Dawn would have been over before dinner!

 

[highfigh]

they all have a particular use, trouble is, the hands some of them end up in. I'm a competitive shotgun shooter, I own 8 shotguns, yes I can only shoot one at a time, yet each one has a particular use. Two analogies(one I know you'll understand).......... ask any competent golfer how many drivers and putters they own ! and ask any serious bicyclist how many bikes they own !!

agreed .........

I would say the incompetent golfers have more drivers and putters because they're always looking for an excuse and they're more likely to believe the claims fed them by ads and people who sell golf equipment. I worked with someone who was always trying to buy & sell things- everything he owned was for sale and it was always 'special' in some way. He offered his clubs at a manager's meeting one day and he 'only' wanted $900. I asked about his handicap and he said it was around 20. I told him to take some lessons because it's not the clubs, it's the swing. He was pretty annoyed after I told him what I use (still, and that meeting was over 20 years ago) and that my average score was 80, for 18 holes. I know someone else who's a member at a country club and can't putt to save his life, so he has a stand in his basement with at least 50 putters in it. I have played well and poorly with the same clubs- it's not as if they revolted against me, it was MY fault. I now putt well with the same club that allowed me to reach my dream of 46 putts in one 18 hole round. Ah, good times!

 

[Trell]

People are driving & walking through gaps in the wall now- why would they need to breach it?

Didn't Trump say the Wall is perfect?

 

[highfigh]

Regarding the 2nd Amendment, it says:

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

A very oddly worded sentence, to say the least, and constructed in the typically negative orientation of the Bill of Rights; focusing on what the federal government can't do. I know that power-hungry, government-control-over-everyone-and-everything so-called "liberals" want to interpret the 2nd Amendment as applying solely to "well-regulated Militia", but, that's not reflective of good English grammar. This sentence, however annoying, is clearly a very carefully constructed statement. Looks like a three-humped camel designed by a committee to me. Personally, if I were constructing that sentence I would have inserted the word "and" after the second comma for clarity, but there's no reasonable way to interpret this sentence as only applying to state militias.

If someone were to ask them at the time about how far people would slide WRT decadence and violence, I doubt they would have seen the current state of events. Hell, I couldn't have imagined it and I was born in the late-'50s. At this point, I'm amazed the US still exists in any form that could be considered similar to the original concept.

As far as the comma- IIRC, the rule about commas joining phrases like these requires that the parts outside of them needs to stand on its own if the middle were to be removed and in this case, it does.

If they had written 'The people' s right to keep and bear Arms in order to maintain a well regulated 'Militia shall be ensured and never infringed, being necessary to the security of a free state", I don't think we would be discussing this because it's more specific and it's possible that our personal right to own weapons might have been stripped long ago.

The argument against gun ownership could have been "You're not part of a militia, so you don't need guns" and since forming a random militia would likely be seen as vigilantism or insurrection, it would have been stopped. There's nothing explicit in the 2nd Amendment about guns being needed for self-defense, but I think it was understood and assumed at the time.

 

[Trell]

...Anyway, you are simply grandstanding! What have you done to free someone from slavery, actual slavery? If you’d like to PM me I can discuss it privately but organizations I support actively free the oppressed and hunt the oppressors in America and around the globe, some of whom marched with MLK, I wasn’t born yet. A little girl in Vietnam was recently raped, burned alive and had her hands and feet cutoff. [my bold] She survived and is being well taken care of, and is in extremely good spirits [my bold].

The poster you replied to can rebut your post himself. That said, the girl is in extremely good spirits? Really, I mean, really?

Her oppressor was given the opportunity to accept the Lord Jesus Christ before...

I call that murder, and you support that? I thought you where the Paragon of Justice and the Constitution?

 

[highfigh]

Didn't Trump say the Wall is perfect?

He says a lot of things- his use of language reminds me of a young child.