The right to bear arms

onelongsong

inmytree wrote:

I'm guessing the gun lobby and the fact guns are a billion dollar industry have more to do with those laws....

but that's just me....

THE PEOPLE VOTED IN THE LAW. it was on the ballot during a general election. do you think the gun lobbists paid off the entire state?
just wondering.

inmytree

onelongsong wrote:

THE PEOPLE VOTED IN THE LAW. it was on the ballot during a general election. do you think the gun lobbists paid off the entire state?
just wondering.

in all 23 states...?

onelongsong

CorporateWhore wrote:

You have no basis to believe this!

he's looking at gun crime stats and ignoring the overall crime stats. crime went up. stabbing deaths went up. once guns were banned the criminals had a field day because they could break into a house knowing they won't be confronted by an armed citizen.
the queen didn't remove crime; only her citizens ability to defend themselves.

onelongsong

inmytree wrote:

in all 23 states...?

YES SIR! in fact; it didn't pass in wisconsin by a narrow margin a couple years back.

sweet adeline

http://www.bustedtees.com/shirt/secondamendment/male

inmytree

onelongsong wrote:

YES SIR! in fact; it didn't pass in wisconsin by a narrow margin a couple years back.

with all due respect, where can I find this information...?

onelongsong

inmytree wrote:

with all due respect, where can I find this information...?

i heard it from a friend of 30+ years that lived in wisconsin until last year. i believe it was the last general election and i'll email him now to see if he has any information. when i get a few minutes i'll look around the web to see where i can find election information. he's anti hand gun and would rant about it constantly.

CorporateWhore

onelongsong wrote:

he's looking at gun crime stats and ignoring the overall crime stats. crime went up. stabbing deaths went up. once guns were banned the criminals had a field day because they could break into a house knowing they won't be confronted by an armed citizen.
the queen didn't remove crime; only her citizens ability to defend themselves.

Amen to that!!

69charger

inmytree wrote:

with all due respect, where can I find this information...?

IT PASSED BOTH HOUSES!!!! Then the fucking hippie pinko commie uberliberal governer of ours VETOED IT! It went to an override vote and fell short by 2 votes of a two-thirds majority in the House.

Thank jeebus we can still own machine guns ;-)

http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=388837

dunkman

i'm more than happy americans like shooting each other and allowing geeks who get bullied by sport jocks the opportunity to waste 30+ lives in one day... its the sensible approach as it reduces the surplus population... and i believe it was Jesus..or maybe it was Walt Disney.... who said "shoot each other to death fat americans and heaven awaits... free tacos to the best mess of a kids face"...

keep on shooting each other.... funeral parlours need the income

dunkman

oil alternative wrote:

the right to bear arms

was created in 1789 at a time of inner turmoil in the States, and guns were prevalent in a society that had a tempestuous law and order status... so it was fine for the time...

by contrast Scotland declared a law in 1789 stating that "if a man jumps over your fence to steal turnips then you are lawfully entitled to stab him the face with a boat and take his kids to the slave market to sell for new kilt material"

things were different 200 years ago... move with the times... now we arent allowed to sell his kids, but we can still poke him in the eye with a boat... an AMENDMENT it's called... americans have had loads before... make another one

chopitdown

Americans use firearms to defend themselves from criminals at least 764,000 times a year. This figure is the lowest among a group of 9 nationwide surveys done by organizations including Gallup and the Los Angeles Times. (16b)


Florida adopted a right-to-carry law in 1987. Between 1987 and 1996, these changes occurred:
Florida United States
homicide rate -36% -0.4%

firearm homicide rate -37% 15%

handgun homicide rate -41% 24%

About 6,000 children were caught with guns at school in 1997 and 1998. Out of these, 13 were prosecuted by the Clinton administration Justice Department. (52)

* In October of 1997, sixteen-year-old Luke Woodham stabbed his mother to death and then went to school with a rifle where he shot 9 students, killing 2 of them. Assistant Principal Joel Myrick raced to his car, retrieved a .45 caliber handgun, and used it to subdue Woodham until police arrived. (51)(53)

http://www.justfacts.com/issues.guncontrol.asp

69charger

dunkman wrote:

was created in 1789 at a time of inner turmoil in the States, and guns were prevalent in a society that had a tempestuous law and order status... so it was fine for the time...

Wrong.

The Second Amendment is timeless. It was created to provide the ultimate of the "checks and balances", the duty of the people to overthrow the government should that government turn tyrannical.

Before you make the argument that a rifle can't beat an apache attack helicopter and therefore The Second Amendment is useless, remember that we have an all volunteer army made up of ordinary Americans. They would have to agree to fight for the tyrannical government against thier own friends, family, and neighbors in the first place which would be highly unlikely.

In any case I own an Armalite AR-50 so I'm not to worried about Helicopters ;-)

Collin

CorporateWhore wrote:

Look:

If the psycho is willing to kill someone with his guns, he's not too worried about breaking the law to take the guns on campus in the first place.

Therefore, we need to allow weapons on campus for at least professors. Currently there are NO guns allowed on Virginia campuses. We've seen what that results in: the only person with a gun is the psycho who isn't afraid of being caught with a gun on campus.

You think making it illegal to have a gun on campus is keeping criminals from bringing them on campus? Do you really believe that's working?

Yes, I think it should be illegal to have a gun on campus, except for campus security or campus police.

Do you honestly think bringing more guns into schools is the solution.

And as for this:

onelongsong wrote:

and i believe that. an armed citizen will not stop crime. nothing will. crime has been with us since cane and able. but a citizen with a gun will deter crime.
stats have proven that. which is why 23 states allow you to carry.

Bullshit. Stats haven't proven this at all. Correlation doesn't imply causation.

inmytree

69charger wrote:

IT PASSED BOTH HOUSES!!!! Then the fucking hippie pinko commie uberliberal governer of ours VETOED IT! It went to an override vote and fell short by 2 votes of a two-thirds majority in the House.

Thank jeebus we can still own machine guns ;-)

http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=388837

that's the way she goes, that's the way she goes...

anyhoo, I was wondering about the 23 states that have supposedly passed concealed weapons laws based on voting...that's that data I'm interested in...

onelongsong

69charger wrote:

Wrong.

The Second Amendment is timeless. It was created to provide the ultimate of the "checks and balances", the duty of the people to overthrow the government should that government turn tyrannical.

Before you make the argument that a rifle can't beat an apache attack helicopter and therefore The Second Amendment is useless, remember that we have an all volunteer army made up of ordinary Americans. They would have to agree to fight for the tyrannical government against thier own friends, family, and neighbors in the first place which would be highly unlikely.

In any case I own an Armalite AR-50 so I'm not to worried about Helicopters ;-)

and that says it all.
isn't it funny how the countries without guns call on the us when they get in trouble? in the last 100 years; europe has been taken by dictators twice; cuba once; iraq; iran; afganistan; several central and south american countries; yet people keep saying the second amendment is outdated.
i wonder if we'd have been taken by a dictator if we had been disarmed. it happened almost everywhere else so why not america? after d-day; missles were found aimed at the uk filled with nuclear waste. had we not invaded when we did; the uk would still be unfit for human life.

Collin

onelongsong wrote:

and that says it all.
isn't it funny how the countries without guns call on the us when they get in trouble? in the last 100 years; europe has been taken by dictators twice; cuba once; iraq; iran; afganistan; several central and south american countries; yet people keep saying the second amendment is outdated.
i wonder if we'd have been taken by a dictator if we had been disarmed. it happened almost everywhere else so why not america? after d-day; missles were found aimed at the uk filled with nuclear waste. had we not invaded when we did; the uk would still be unfit for human life.

I always thought it was the U.S. Armed Forces that fought these wars, not regular citizens with their own guns.

:rolleyes:

edit: I might have read this the wrong way.

Anyway, I think America and indeed any country no matter how heavy its citizens are armed can be taken by a dictator. True, the American freedom fighters will have an advantage, they'll already have the weaponry to fight back, the other countries will have to wait longer before they can obtain them. But either way, I honestly doubt that this will make a difference in the long run.

onelongsong

inmytree wrote:

that's the way she goes, that's the way she goes...

anyhoo, I was wondering about the 23 states that have supposedly passed concealed weapons laws based on voting...that's that data I'm interested in...

have you got a bloody fax? if not i'll write them out after a nap.

onelongsong

Collin wrote:

I always thought it was the U.S. Armed Forces that fought these wars, not regular citizens with their own guns.

:rolleyes:

it was ordinary citizens fighting with their own guns when our mainland was invaded. that includes britain twice; mexico once; and possibly the french; although i think we bought their candy arses out. when japan was poised off california the citizens were prepared to defend the mainland too. that was august of 1944. only 63 years ago. current history. during the cold war citizens were prepared in the event of war. i don't know how old you are but invasion by ussr was a real threat.

Collin

onelongsong wrote:

it was ordinary citizens fighting with their own guns when our mainland was invaded. that includes britain twice; mexico once; and possibly the french; although i think we bought their candy arses out. when japan was poised off california the citizens were prepared to defend the mainland too. that was august of 1944. only 63 years ago. current history. during the cold war citizens were prepared in the event of war. i don't know how old you are but invasion by ussr was a real threat.

See my edited post.

A president or whatever can become a dictator before you know it, the economy might be low, all he needs is the people's trust and then he can do whatever he wants (including as you said taking guns because the people will feel safe), if he can make people feel safe and create a booming economy... a president (a closet dictator?) can start doing his thing and the people won't notice because they're too occupied with buying new cars and houses and fancy holidays...