None. If I can afford it, I should be allowed to own it.
Machine guns, RPGs, flame-throwers, tanks, etc. Only small arms should be allowed.
In addition to heavy weapons, assault weapons should also be banned.
Handguns and semi-automatic rifles should also be banned.
The above post is actually from Toehold. He private messaged it to me, but didn`t want to post it because he doesn`t want to out-smug us Canadians.
He almost never knows what the **** he's talking about it, which explains why his 'opinions' are always so ****ed up.
He's a 10 year old who memorizes information intended for intelligent adults. He doesn't understand what he knows.
-Vlad on JackelSporty
mmaweekly's first diss rap! - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JzNE3...ature=youtu.be
the actual 2nd amendment is pretty simple,
"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"
The "common weapons" does not necessarily refer to common military style weapons, the supreme court has repeatedly said that, as will be discussed lower.
there have been huge changes since the constitution. there actually wasn't a federal military at the time, back then it was the states and locals. James Madison actually argued to not have a Bill of Rights (and with it 2nd amendment) because he didn't think that the federal government could arrange an army strong enough to fend of the militia.
A foundation of American political thought during the Revolutionary period was the well justified concern about political corruption and governmental tyranny. Even the federalists, fending off their opponents who accused them of creating an oppressive regime, were careful to acknowledge the risks of tyranny. Against that backdrop, the framers saw the personal right to bear arms as a potential check against tyranny.
the landmark Supreme Court case that defended the 2nd Amendment was District of Columbia vs Heller, and even that which is a very pro indidual rights did say that there can be limits as seen below
"(2) Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose: For example, concealed weapons prohibitions have been upheld under the Amendment or state analogues. The Courtís opinion should not be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms. Miller's holding that the sorts of weapons protected are those "in common use at the time" finds support in the historical tradition of prohibiting the carrying of dangerous and unusual weapons
To clarify that its ruling does not invalidate a broad range of existing firearm laws, the majority opinion, written by Justice Antonin Scalia, said:
Although we do not undertake an exhaustive historical analysis today of the full scope of the Second Amendment, nothing in our opinion should be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms.
I want to parallel your argument here though. What if there is a new law that forbids martial arts b/c too many people get hurt? Too many people get into fights and too many assault and battery charges lead legislators to think if MMA wasn't allowed on TV and people practicing martial arts shouldn't be allowed anymore, there would be less violence. Using your own argument, you should be okay with that b/c do you really ever need to use your martial arts? I mean seriously, how many street fights do you think you will be in? I know plenty of people that went their whole lives without ever being in a fight so that leads me to believe that you are okay with it as long as it (A) isn't necessary, (B) people actually get hurt b/c of it, (C) people will be safer and less apt to recieve harm b/c of it, and (D) rights can be limited in some cases.
I would like to see an argument where your logic against guns can't be used as ab argument against martial arts. Neither are "necessary," both can harm people, and both are perfectly safe if the person participating is a responsible adult. I mean, should Cobra Kai really result in other people not being able to enjoy martial arts?
In fact, I'm not sure I'm anti assault weapons, so I'm not sure where you are going with this, and so no, I would not be against people banning martial arts in your scenario.
I keep going back and forth on the issue of "assault weapons", because I COULD see there being a need if our country was suddenly at war.
There are cases however, where I think the "possible need" might be outweighed by the "possible harm", like with biological weapons, nuclear weapons, anti aircraft guns, weapons of mass destruction and chemical weapons.
I don't see anyone arguing that anyone should be able to go out and buy the most hazardous bomb making materials, so maybe some other people agree with me.
I am actually more afraid of what cars are capable of, and made the argument that I think cars shouldn't have the ability to exceed a certain speed, and that I see as a bigger issue.
But the post I had initially responded to (and we could discuss this further in PM cause I don't feel like talking a lot more in this thread) was the one where you said that you thought I thought the government should be able to take away all our rights to bare arms and all that **** and would always protect us from everything.
I never said anything like that at all and I don't think that even remotely.
I'm not recommending a ban on guns in the US (faaaaar too late for that), just looking to mitigate the effects of this classic race to the bottom.
Probably nothing has done so much harm to the liberal cause as the wooden insistence of some liberals on certain rules of thumb, above all the principle of laissez faire.
I don't know what the answer is, but gun "control" is not going to do anything other then piss off the law-abiding citizens. Focusing on mental health, resources for the impoverished, and putting our heads together to focus on societal problems would be more productive. I also don't believe the minority should cause the majority to suffer (suffer being a relative term).
Yes, we live differently. But you are incorrect in your assumption as to the previous access to firearms that your countrymen had.
I agree the Patriot Act was disgusting as to the powers that were granted the government, by the government. All in the name of safety. Same excuse as every other time they pass some overstepping shiiiit.
No, you don't completely get why that not only do I want to keep them, but at the level of ferocity that shall be brought down on those big bad jack-booted storm troopers when they come to enforce the latest safety net, so designed to "protect the children." Yes, I am a sworn Law Enforcement Officer of my state, albeit a Reserve Deputy, but I shall lay the smack down on anyone foolish enough to make an attempt at me and mine.
A rifle is the symbol of a Free Man. Always has been. Yes, I agree, the average man takes it in the ass throughout their entire life from Uncle Sam, but at some point, each man must make a decision what they are going to stand for.
This is my point. This is my line in the sand. I've spent the last 18 years of my life serving this nation, whether it be the military, VOLUNTEER law enforcement, VOLUNTEER firefighter, VOLUNTEER wilderness search & rescue, weapons and tactics instructor for all kind of gov't agencies, community functions, whatever. I've never asked a single thing from America. Not a single fuccin thing.
I came from nothing. A dirt poor farm boy from Southeast Oklahoma who left the farm to become a Ranger. I've done things I'm not proud of, I've stood among great men, I lost much of my soul under the service of this nation's flag. But everything I did, I did it without asking or expecting anything in return. Upon getting out, I completed an apprenticeship to become a Journeyman Millwright, went on to get tons of skilled trade certifications, completed my testing to become a Industrial Electrican, put myself through college during the day while working as a Industrial Maintenance Technician in a steel plant at night, went on to get my Bachelors Degree in Business Management, moved up the food chain. Promoted in 2010 to Maintenance Engineering Manager, in charge of all plant maintenance, engineering, and production operations at a local company. I only answer to the Site Manager and God. Now, I'm working on completing my Master's in the spring. So don't think I'm some paranoid "prepper", guys. I ain't. I've just been on the other side of the fence and seen first hand the atrocities committed by governments (mine included) to those they deem fit to conquer. And the argument that most who feel as I do are a bunch of losers who haven't done anything with their lives? Re-read this paragraph boys. Most of the guys who've been where I've been have been extremely successful, myself included.
I've put my ass on the line. For my buddies. For my community during crazy ass rescues. For the famlies of missing persons in the backcountry. For the famlies of drowning victim in whitewater rapids. And I've done it all without asking for anything. I don't want or need anything from anyone. I did it all because it needed to be done, and I happened to be capable of doing it.
But this is it for me, boys. I've done nothing but complain when they've passed another fucctard law, or regulation, or whatever, all in the name of safety or security. I'm not complaining any longer. It is what it is and America has asked for our liberties to be taken away. "Oh, make us safer, O'Master". Don't let the big bad people hurt us.
My line in the sand is there. Those who choose to step across it do so at their own peril, cause I know a thing or two about warfare. And to those who say, what can a mere rifle do against tanks, planes, and rockets. That shouldn't be too hard to figure out. Ask the "insurgents" in Iraq and Afghanistan. Ask the "sammies" in Mogadishu. Ask the "VC" in Vietnam.
And they didn't have anywhere near the level of training that me and WHOLE TON of my buddies have had.
Last edited by JROD; 01-02-2013 at 03:28 PM.
ut ceteri vivant