The second amendment to the constitution of the united states

[Redbone]

NRA's Real Agenda......
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=aM9hZXBmA5g

What is wrong with that, seems right to me! There is so much BS in the laws that anyone with a gun (or even ammunition it seems!) has such a narrow window of use that one mis-step you become entangled in a legal quagmire. They have no intentions on letting the common man what the pitfalls of the laws are then they will pick and choose to apply them as they want.
This kind of legislation puts the leftist's intentions in BOLD FACE TYPE!:bang head::bang head:

 

[XBoxMax]

By Dan Stamm and David Chang , NBCPhiladelphia.com
Lee Heng says he didn't think twice about what he had to do when he heard two intruders break into his home early Easter morning.


Follow @NBCNewsUS
"You don't have time to think," said the 63-year-old South Philadelphia homeowner, husband and father of two. "They came like lightning."
Police say two men broke in through the second floor bathroom window of Heng's home on the 1400 block of S. 6th Street just before 1 a.m.
Heng was sleeping when he heard his 14-year-old son screaming. Realizing his son was in danger, Heng immediately took action.
"I jumped out of the bed and I grabbed my gun," said Heng.
Police say the armed intruders confronted Heng and a struggle ensued. During the scuffle, Heng opened fire and the men left the house through the window and onto the rear roof, according to police.



When police arrived, they found one of the men on the back roof dead. The other intruder got away and was spotted on surveillance video fleeing on foot towards 5th Street.
Heng says one of the men struck him with a gun during the fight. But Heng is thankful that all he suffered was a cut on his lip, considering the fact that his son was sitting at the kitchen table only a few feet away from the two gunmen.
"They didn't hurt him because I came out at the right time," said Heng. "If I came out a few seconds later, they might have."
Heng says he recognized the men from the neighborhood and believes they were after the jewelry he sells at his store on the first floor of his home.
Police continue to search for the second suspect. Officials say Heng will not be charged because he has a right to carry a gun inside his home even though he doesn't have a permit.
In Pennsylvania, a person can be found justified to use force against someone who has broken into their home under the so-called ?Castle Doctrine? that was amended in 2011.

 

[forestdaledave]

Even those Americans with only 2 active brain cells (51%) should understand the simple wording too....

Like the meaning of a " Well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free state". As an example.
David

 

[ZackDaniels]

Who was it said in a earlier political thread , " Obama has never shown any interest in gun control " ? Still feel that way ?

That was me and yeah pretty much. For all the stuff Obama and his administration have been getting credited and blamed for it hasn't been doing much at all.

The biggest sparks are surrounding local legislation to California and New York. Including the subject of Rand Paul's letter above that seems to have prompted the Obama comment.

The federal efforts are on funding research, funding an awareness campaign on safe gun ownership, and applying existing background check legislation to private sales. Things I were saying would be good ideas before all this stuff even went down. Responsible owners do this anyway, and nobody seems to be able to agree on what would be effective or a waste of time and money to solve these school shootings. Funding research will go a long way in finding ways to fix the problem that don't amount to trail and error.

The private sale legislation is the only thing that has any right to be controversial. I agreed that it's kind of **** that you'll have to file paperwork to give your property to a friend or family member, but I also said you'd have to be naive to not see the potential for abuse. People are going to fall more on one side or another of that divide and there you have it, controversy.

Enforcing existing laws? Advocating responsible ownership? Efforts to get the facts before issuing legislation based on gut reactions? Why, it's like he's in the tank for the NRA! They've been saying all this for years! :bang head: OBAMAAAAAAAAA :bang head:

 

[85 MAX-fan]

Like the meaning of a " Well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free state". As an example.
David

Instead of only partially quoting the statement DAVE, why don't you display it in its entirety?

The answer is because despite the fact that the 2nd amendment has been found by our congress to be a guaranteed individual right, and the fact that the Supreme court has also ruled that to be the case, you statists continue to attempt to LIE about this issue.

 

[Traumahawk]

Like the meaning of a " Well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free state". As an example.
David

Yep...like the laws that we have in place, that unfortunately arent being enforced. More laws that arent being enforced, arent the answer.

 

[85 MAX-fan]

http://www.saf.org/lawreviews/fieldsandhardy.html

David

DAVE,
Why would you post a link to only one opinion within the document the report of the subcommittee on the constitution on the right to keep and bear arms?

To all of you on the forum I will tell you. This was a Senate report that found the right to keep and bear arms was an INDIVIDUAL RIGHT. That was the finding of our own government.

Dave did not post the entire research paper because he, and the likes of the gun control statists, want to try to lie to you about the true meaning of the second amendment.
These people rely on the fact that you are too busy, and ignorant of the facts on this matter to research the entire doccument. They have been repeating this lie thousands and thousands of times for decades. They believe you are stupid.

 

[85 MAX-fan]

That was me and yeah pretty much. For all the stuff Obama and his administration have been getting credited and blamed for it hasn't been doing much at all.

The biggest sparks are surrounding local legislation to California and New York. Including the subject of Rand Paul's letter above that seems to have prompted the Obama comment.

The federal efforts are on funding research, funding an awareness campaign on safe gun ownership, and applying existing background check legislation to private sales. Things I were saying would be good ideas before all this stuff even went down. Responsible owners do this anyway, and nobody seems to be able to agree on what would be effective or a waste of time and money to solve these school shootings. Funding research will go a long way in finding ways to fix the problem that don't amount to trail and error.

The private sale legislation is the only thing that has any right to be controversial. I agreed that it's kind of **** that you'll have to file paperwork to give your property to a friend or family member, but I also said you'd have to be naive to not see the potential for abuse. People are going to fall more on one side or another of that divide and there you have it, controversy.

Enforcing existing laws? Advocating responsible ownership? Efforts to get the facts before issuing legislation based on gut reactions? Why, it's like he's in the tank for the NRA! They've been saying all this for years! :bang head: OBAMAAAAAAAAA :bang head:

Zack,
Do really honestly believe we need to spend more tax payer dollars we don't have to "research" to "fix these problems"?

The fact of the matter is that the "closure of the gun show loop hole" is a phrase used to distort the truth on an effort to build a database of gun owners and records of ownership to be used for confiscation. Cut and dried. Its a lie.

Doesn't it bother you that all of these talking heads, when pinned down, admit openly that NONE of this legislation would have, or can, prevent another Newtown?
Lanza MURDERED to get the guns used in that shooting. He didn't get them from a gun show as far as we have been told. This legislation is only aimed at reducing the right of the people to own a firearm.

 

[85 MAX-fan]

Just another way to seperate people from their money. Start a website, throw a bunch of BS together and then ask for money. Laugh on the way to the Bank. I wonder if Rand Paul even knows about it.
David

Kinda like at the top of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence web page eh Dave??

 

[dannymax]

Zack,
Do really honestly believe we need to spend more tax payer dollars we don't have to "research" to "fix these problems"?

The fact of the matter is that the "closure of the gun show loop hole" is a phrase used to distort the truth on an effort to build a database of gun owners and records of ownership to be used for confiscation. Cut and dried. Its a lie.

Doesn't it bother you that all of these talking heads, when pinned down, admit openly that NONE of this legislation would have, or can, prevent another Newtown?
Lanza MURDERED to get the guns used in that shooting. He didn't get them from a gun show as far as we have been told. This legislation is only aimed at reducing the right of the people to own a firearm.

And THAT's it in a nutshell. It's simply a CONTROL issue....not a resolution issue. The crazies will still be out there, the bad guys will still be out there....and they will ALWAYS be able to get guns to perform their nasty deeds with.

All this chickenshit legislation is going to do is put a bunch of previously honest law abiding citizens outside the law and add stress and pressure to a huge portion of the population who have done nothing to deserve it.

The crazies and the bad guys....the actual perpetrators of all the violence??? Well, their status will remain pretty much unaffected!

Tell you the truth....I'm glad all my guns went to the bottom of The Dismal Swamp in that horrific airboat crash last fall....I'm out of this deal completely! unk:

 

[ZackDaniels]

Zack,
Do really honestly believe we need to spend more tax payer dollars we don't have to "research" to "fix these problems"?

The fact of the matter is that the "closure of the gun show loop hole" is a phrase used to distort the truth on an effort to build a database of gun owners and records of ownership to be used for confiscation. Cut and dried. Its a lie.

Doesn't it bother you that all of these talking heads, when pinned down, admit openly that NONE of this legislation would have, or can, prevent another Newtown?
Lanza MURDERED to get the guns used in that shooting. He didn't get them from a gun show as far as we have been told. This legislation is only aimed at reducing the right of the people to own a firearm.

The 1000+ gun deaths since that incident, many of them accidental and some involving children unsupervised with guns easily obtained say yes, an awareness campaign is money well spent.

We went back and forth on this before. With your scenario being I should leave guns readily accessible in case I need to fend off a bunch of home invading gang members, and mine being concern of some neighbor's kid showing mine a loaded weapon they found.

Since we talked about it, there's been at least one story of a man who bought a gun because he was robbed. A gun he left loaded on his living room table which his resulted in the self-inflicted death of his 2-year-old child. http://www.myrtlebeachonline.com/2012/12/27/3241835/father-charged-in-christmas-shooting.html

I support the right to own firearms, and I can't find any fault in teaching people how to properly use and store them. Something all this more extreme Obama-unrelated legislation don't seem to be focusing on at all.

 

[Traumahawk]

Unfortunately people need to be responsible for their own actions. That father will live with his actions for his entire life.

I personally think that HFCS (High Frutose Corn Syrup) is a huge health hazard. It is the reason why the average american eats 55 pounds of sugar a year, and obesity and diabetes are huge health concerns. (Diabetics have a 33% chance of having a silent heart attack, its part of the disease process) BUT....New York went too far with BIG BROTHER stepping in. I'm an adult, and having a Soda (any size) is a choice that Ive made.

 

[ZackDaniels]

I agree with you there. I also oppose helmet laws and seat belt laws. I recognize that they save lives, and don't argue their value to safety as some who oppose them. What I oppose about them is that it shouldn't be the business of the state if somebody chooses to use or not use a safety device.

In this case though, I don't feel children are responsible for the complete negligence of their parents. I see value in educating either by awareness campaigns or mandatory education as part of a permit process. Permits and licensing for weapons has it's slippery slopes, awareness campaigns do not, so what's the harm? Information is valuable on it's own merits, and in this case it may well save lives. Granted, not the lives of those involved in school shootings, but those are not the only ones that matter.

:edit:
HFCS isn't really any more dangerous than sugar. The volume of it is causing such a concern because it's so much cheaper than sugar, and as a result it's finding it's way into everything. Legislation against specific foods in response is stupid, I agree... but not exactly related to gun control or responsible ownership campaigns?

 

[dannymax]

Saw on the news tonight that 443,000 deaths a year attributed to cigarettes!! Firearms deaths pale in comparison....so it doesn't appear to be deaths that are the concern, just SOME deaths, caused in a CERTAIN manner.

THE CHILDREN you say? Ever hear of second hand smoke? What a joke! :rofl_200:

 

[ZackDaniels]

Personal choice for the most part. The dangers of second hand smoke are there as a result of prolonged exposure. That number gets significantly smaller when you look only at second hand cases which is:

http://www.cancer.org/cancer/cancercauses/tobaccocancer/secondhand-smoke

About 3,400 lung cancer deaths in non-smoking adults

I wonder what portion of those cases stem from the 50's and 60's when even doctor's were allowed to smoke while giving examinations? When a lot of people didn't even know about the risks due to a lack of education and research on the subject, which was followed by government funded awareness campaigns.

I bet it's a whole lot smaller number now than it was then.

 

[Traumahawk]

I agree with you there. I also oppose helmet laws and seat belt laws. I recognize that they save lives, and don't argue their value to safety as some who oppose them. What I oppose about them is that it shouldn't be the business of the state if somebody chooses to use or not use a safety device.

In this case though, I don't feel children are responsible for the complete negligence of their parents. I see value in educating either by awareness campaigns or mandatory education as part of a permit process. Permits and licensing for weapons has it's slippery slopes, awareness campaigns do not, so what's the harm? Information is valuable on it's own merits, and in this case it may well save lives. Granted, not the lives of those involved in school shootings, but those are not the only ones that matter.

:edit:
HFCS isn't really any more dangerous than sugar. The volume of it is causing such a concern because it's so much cheaper than sugar, and as a result it's finding it's way into everything. Legislation against specific foods in response is stupid, I agree... but not exactly related to gun control or responsible ownership campaigns?

LOL...no...this isnt related to gun control, but just to illustrate a point...something may not be good for you...or even dangerous...but it is your CHOICE if you use the product or not. Actually HFCS are SWEETER than sugar for its volume. On a scale of sweetness a teaspoon of sugar is 100 (it is the standard that everything else is rated by), a teaspoon of HFCS is 120.

I am with you on helments and seatbelts.

Again I agree with you a 2 year old child cannot be held liable for his actions. The Father should be charged with manslaughter, for his reckless disregard. Should the parent be forced to keep the gun in a safe? I dont know...I think that the parent(s) should be responsible enough to teach their children the do's and dont's of gun control, and teaching the children how to be responsible. LOL...and that is one of my sore points...parents that want to be "friends" on facebook...and not be a parent and teach their children right from wrong.

As always....just my opinion.

 

[85 MAX-fan]

the 1000+ gun deaths since that incident, many of them accidental and some involving children unsupervised with guns easily obtained say yes, an awareness campaign is money well spent.

Where did you get your numbers zack? 1000+ is a propaganda lie.

we went back and forth on this before. With your scenario being i should leave guns readily accessible in case i need to fend off a bunch of home invading gang members, and mine being concern of some neighbor's kid showing mine a loaded weapon they found.

No zack, at no point did I advocate leaving guns accessible to children unsupervised. You do realize this is not one or the other don't you?
Who has taught you that people are too stupid to run their own lives, and more importantly that the government can run them for us? Is it the same politicians that have looted illinois taxpayers money at every turn only to plunge it into near insolvency? Are these the geniouses you trust? Is it the chicago police that have beaten, tortured, and intimidated honest people zack? Are these the folks you want entering your home for nearly any reason and guarding your rights?
Why is it you would allow a neighbor to be playing with a gun along with your child unsupervised? More importantly if you are dumb enough to do that why are you supporting the violation of my rights?

Children die every year when they access their parents cars zack. How about we have government inspections at any time, unannounced, to see if you have your car keys locked up. If not you face prison.

since we talked about it, there's been at least one story of a man who bought a gun because he was robbed. A gun he left loaded on his living room table which his resulted in the self-inflicted death of his 2-year-old child. http://www.myrtlebeachonline.com/2012/12/27/3241835/father-charged-in-christmas-shooting.html

So the actions of idiots are the reason for the suspension of our constitutional rights? And how exactly would that prevent it from happening again zack? You of course know that it can't.

i support the right to own firearms, and i can't find any fault in teaching people how to properly use and store them. Something all this more extreme obama-unrelated legislation don't seem to be focusing on at all.

why is it that you didn't respond to any of my questions directly zack?

 

[85 MAX-fan]

I agree with you there. I also oppose helmet laws and seat belt laws. I recognize that they save lives, and don't argue their value to safety as some who oppose them. What I oppose about them is that it shouldn't be the business of the state if somebody chooses to use or not use a safety device.

In this case though, I don't feel children are responsible for the complete negligence of their parents. I see value in educating either by awareness campaigns or mandatory education as part of a permit process. Permits and licensing for weapons has it's slippery slopes, awareness campaigns do not, so what's the harm? Information is valuable on it's own merits, and in this case it may well save lives. Granted, not the lives of those involved in school shootings, but those are not the only ones that matter.

:edit:
HFCS isn't really any more dangerous than sugar. The volume of it is causing such a concern because it's so much cheaper than sugar, and as a result it's finding it's way into everything. Legislation against specific foods in response is stupid, I agree... but not exactly related to gun control or responsible ownership campaigns?

Why is it you never mention the THOUSANDS of crimes (murder, ****, assualt, theft etc) that are PREVENTED by people with firearms, but you are willing to eliminate a constitutional right because "at least one" moron allegedly leaves a gun out that results in a childs death? Is it because these incidents oddly aren't on the 10 o'clock news?

 

[ZackDaniels]

why is it that you didn't respond to any of my questions directly zack?

Sorry I thought I was? Let me make it more direct.

Zack,
Do really honestly believe we need to spend more tax payer dollars we don't have to "research" to "fix these problems"?

Yes. If one thing has become clear in the months since these debates started, it's that neither side has much to stand on with their arguments. We're talking about clip sizes and weapon classification without a clue as to the actual effects. Just hypothetical scenarios.

The fact of the matter is that the "closure of the gun show loop hole" is a phrase used to distort the truth on an effort to build a database of gun owners and records of ownership to be used for confiscation. Cut and dried. Its a lie.

Are some sales still subject to background checks while others are not? Yes? They shouldn't be.

Doesn't it bother you that all of these talking heads, when pinned down, admit openly that NONE of this legislation would have, or can, prevent another Newtown?
Lanza MURDERED to get the guns used in that shooting. He didn't get them from a gun show as far as we have been told. This legislation is only aimed at reducing the right of the people to own a firearm.

No not really. As it stands I haven't heard a good fix. That's again, why I'm in favor of funded research to see if somebody can propose something with legs to stand on.

when I edit things directly in quotes it's hard to directly quote so please paraphrase the 'where did you get your numbers propaganda thing'

Here they are charted on a map.
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_..._death_since_newtown_sandy_hook_shooting.html

I don't have a more official source as those are compiled annually. Names, dates, locations, and counts for each instance is pretty solid though. Each one has a source to it's original news story as well.

Why is it you never mention the THOUSANDS of crimes (murder, ****, assualt, theft etc) that are PREVENTED by people with firearms, but you are willing to eliminate a constitutional right because "at least one" moron allegedly leaves a gun out that results in a childs death? Is it because these incidents oddly aren't on the 10 o'clock news?

Because I never said anything about eliminating rights. Just that awareness campaigns, universally applied background checks, and funding more research on the topic are all good ideas.

:edit:

Why is it you never mention the THOUSANDS of crimes (murder, ****, assualt, theft etc) that are PREVENTED by people with firearms, but you are willing to eliminate a constitutional right because "at least one" moron allegedly leaves a gun out that results in a childs death? Is it because these incidents oddly aren't on the 10 o'clock news?

Your turn to show some sources for those numbers.

 

[Traumahawk]

The only thing that I dont agree with on the gun death tally, is that it shows total deaths since Sandy Hook, and not broken down into different catagories. Justifiable homicide...IE Police shooting a burgler, or a home owner shooting a burgler shouldnt be on this list. Accidental homicide...or homicide in the commission of a felony, should be 2 seperate catagories.

I dont disagree on the total number, but I do wonder if all the catagories were lumped in together to achieve a higher number for a higher "shock" value.