boyst Posted October 3, 2017 Share Posted October 3, 2017 You think automatic weapons in the hands of ordinary citizens are necessary to maintain a free and stable society? If you believe that, you're insane. I do Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BringBackOrton Posted October 3, 2017 Share Posted October 3, 2017 One can speculate all we want about what the founders would or wouldn't do. I just did it myself. It's an interesting exercise. I truly doubt, and this is just an opinion, that these specific guys, from everything that I have read, which is a lot, would be as steadfast about keeping the second amendment as sacred as the right and the NRA and such do now. These guys would have a very strong opinion on what is going on right now, and I very much doubt it would be I'm worried about our republic and our freedom crumbling if there werent as many guns as people, and our citizens must be able to keep automatic weapons to protect them from standing armies of nation states. Do you think they would be overly worried about 50 or so dead a year in a nation of 360 million? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boyst Posted October 3, 2017 Share Posted October 3, 2017 I understand that's your interpretation of the Second Amendment. I'm not talking about the Second Amendment - I'm talking about whether there is ANY GOOD REASON for automatic military-grade weapons in the hands of ordinary citizens. Putting aside whether it's legal or not - is it a good thing to have? I should move out of the country if I don't like the idea of my kids getting shot with automatic military-grade weapons? it's the SCOTUS interpretation, too. And founding fathers. Are they retarded or something? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeviF Posted October 3, 2017 Share Posted October 3, 2017 One can speculate all we want about what the founders would or wouldn't do. I just did it myself. It's an interesting exercise. I truly doubt, and this is just an opinion, that these specific guys, from everything that I have read, which is a lot, would be as steadfast about keeping the second amendment as sacred as the right and the NRA and such do now. These guys would have a very strong opinion on what is going on right now, and I very much doubt it would be I'm worried about our republic and our freedom crumbling if there werent as many guns as people, and our citizens must be able to keep automatic weapons to protect them from standing armies of nation states. Fair enough. But what they did and didn't do is more important than what they may or may not have thought. They were very purposeful in their drafting of the Constitution (and the Bill of Rights). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted October 3, 2017 Share Posted October 3, 2017 Do you think they would be overly worried about 50 or so dead a year in a nation of 360 million? Everybody should be worried about 50 dead and 500 injured, it's only a matter of what if anything should be done about it. And these were all thinking, opinionated, highly educated (for the most part) men. So yes, very much so. Fair enough. But what they did and didn't do is more important than what they may or may not have thought. They were very purposeful in their drafting of the Constitution (and the Bill of Rights). Absolutely. And geniuses. Which is why they would care a lot and have a lot to say about it if they were alive now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BringBackOrton Posted October 3, 2017 Share Posted October 3, 2017 (edited) Everybody should be worried about 50 dead and 500 injured, it's only a matter of what if anything should be done about it. And these were all thinking, opinionated, highly educated (for the most part) men. So yes, very much so. Absolutely. And geniuses. Which is why they would care a lot and have a lot to say about it if they were alive now. I'm not worried. Saddened, yes. Disgusted. Sympathetic. But not worried. Statistically, the "mass shooting" hysteria is overblown. You're in more danger on the highway. And yet we aren't sitting here talking about if the founders would ban travel over 60 MPH. Edited October 3, 2017 by jmc12290 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boyst Posted October 3, 2017 Share Posted October 3, 2017 While everyone is trying to argue can we make sure we change our Facebook photos Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted October 3, 2017 Share Posted October 3, 2017 I'm not worried. Saddened, yes. Disgusted. Sympathetic. But not worried. Statistically, the "mass shooting" hysteria is overblown. You're in more danger on the highway. And yet we aren't sitting here talking about if the founders would ban travel over 60 MPH. That's a retarded analogy and have the federal and local government do all different kinds of things to stop it that greatly lower that number. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Brown Posted October 3, 2017 Share Posted October 3, 2017 can these unfunny hacks called "latenight" at least wait for the blood to be mopped up before their tired gun control Dem nonsense? we're here to be entertained, tell us jokes, funnymen. Trump has been bad for comedy as the market for late night has become saturated with bashing Trump monologues. I was never a huge fan of Conan, but have switched over to TBS to get the monologue before I go to bed. Come back from retirement Letterman. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BringBackOrton Posted October 3, 2017 Share Posted October 3, 2017 (edited) That's a retarded analogy and have the federal and local government do all different kinds of things to stop it that greatly lower that number.Way to goal shift. Now it's not the number of deaths that worry you, as long as the government achieves some token effort that helps you sleep at night. You're so predictable. 3000 dead a day in MVA's but the REAL worry is 50 a year. No. Edited October 3, 2017 by jmc12290 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rockpile233 Posted October 3, 2017 Share Posted October 3, 2017 The gun culture has been ingrained for a couple hundred years, it won't easily be undone. If you abolished the second Ammendment today (laughable to even think of) there would be a tremendous amount of pain in the near term. You can use your imagination on that. I would argue once you get a couple generations in you'd start to see progress, but everyone is living for today. You would still have the criminally insane to deal with, it would just take a different form. The way I figure, everything has a tax. You want freedom to bear firearms? Well situations like Vegas is the tax you pay. We'd pay a different one if that right was abolished. The price we pay for our firearm culture isn't worth it to me, but I'm one person with one set of experiences. Firearms have saved families too, so it's complicated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aristocrat Posted October 3, 2017 Share Posted October 3, 2017 I think insurance would be a nice start for guns. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted October 3, 2017 Share Posted October 3, 2017 I can't even begin to imagine the class action lawsuit that's going to get shoved up MGM Resort's ass. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aristocrat Posted October 3, 2017 Share Posted October 3, 2017 I can't even begin to imagine the class action lawsuit that's going to get shoved up MGM Resort's ass. Which will get thrown out in about 30 seconds Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted October 3, 2017 Share Posted October 3, 2017 Which will get thrown out in about 30 seconds Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk You'd hope...but "They allowed a madman to assemble an arsenal in one of their hotel rooms" seems pretty easy to get through, at least to a settlement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aristocrat Posted October 3, 2017 Share Posted October 3, 2017 Which will get thrown out in about 30 seconds Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk You'd hope...but "They allowed a madman to assemble an arsenal in one of their hotel rooms" seems pretty easy to get through, at least to a settlement. Allowed? Everyone with luggage would now have to be searched. That's ridiculous Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coach Tuesday Posted October 3, 2017 Share Posted October 3, 2017 it's the SCOTUS interpretation, too. And founding fathers. Are they retarded or something? It's actually not. And you really believe that AUTOMATIC weapons (which aren't even legal now) in the hands of ordinary citizens help foster a free and stable society? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary M Posted October 3, 2017 Share Posted October 3, 2017 I think insurance would be a nice start for guns. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Yes insurance would end the gun problem like it ended the healthcare problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coach Tuesday Posted October 3, 2017 Share Posted October 3, 2017 (edited) I can't even begin to imagine the class action lawsuit that's going to get shoved up MGM Resort's ass. It's not a class action. It would have to be individual lawsuits, although they could have multiple/consolidated plaintiffs. I didn't miss your point about car accidents by the way - it's just so silly I haven't bothered to respond to it. Should there be ANY limits on private weaponry ownership? Should your neighbor have the right, if he wants to, to string claymore mines around the perimeter of his yard, and mount an anti-aircraft gun on his roof? Edited October 3, 2017 by Coach Tuesday Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted October 3, 2017 Share Posted October 3, 2017 Psychiatrist Michael Welner told Fox News this morning that he thinks CNN's priorities, when it comes to mass shootings, are completely twisted. He said, "CNN's gonna have to answer for how they demonize gun enthusiasts and how CNN actually contributes to mass shooting." Welner says that after the incident in Las Vegas, now deemed the deadliest shooting in U.S. history, CNN didn't demonize the shooter. He says that by only hammering on gun control, and not highlighting how horrible the assailant was, the network encourages other shooters. He argues it is a way of complicity elevating the status of a killer, making the sick prestige something to murder for. He continued: "There are no George Zimmerman copycats........................... There are no Donald Sterling copycats.......................... There are no Jerry Sandusky copycats. Why? We've demonized them." And, Welner says, CNN (and probably other mainstream media outlets) doesn't demonize the shooter enough. They give him a lot of airtime, and blame the tool not the man. Video at the link: https://pjmedia.com/video/psychiatrist-cnns-going-answer-twisted-priorities-mass-shootings/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts