First  Prev  1  2  3  Next  Last
Feds reverse decision on concealed weapons
1583 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
18 / M / Ultimate Super Se...
Offline
Posted 12/13/12

cbus82 wrote:

throw a rock at them


i never thought of that
31137 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
100 / F / Ozone
Offline
Posted 12/13/12
Things vary by neighborhood and personal circumstance as to how needed carrying a weapon is.I want to have the right to carry a registered weapon if I feel the need.Registered weapons and more people carrying is not the problem it's the equalizer. The problemof illegal guns being obtained and used by fools and criminals will not go away.Everyone has the right to defend theirs or anothers life.Also, if you think this country isn't a police state in standby mode you ought to read up on what happened at Kent State University in 1970.The soldiers that were supposed to protect the country killed 4 and injured 9 students who were protesting the war.Freedom of speech and the right to assemble went out the window there.Oh and by the way, the soldiers were exhonorated.Washington can declare marshall law,cut off routes of transportation and communication any time they see fit and all civil authorities and military personnel would back them.The number of desenters would be negligible.So, I'd like a gun just in case I might not agree with being caged or controlled or used for target practice.
51324 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
32 / M / US
Offline
Posted 12/13/12 , edited 12/13/12
YOU ARE ALL WRONG!!!

You have NO idea why the second amendment exists in the US. The second amendment has NOTHING to do with defending yourself from everyday crime. That is not why the US constitution made sure to mention it. The US government was originally designed in such a way that opposing factions within the government (house, senate, president, and supreme court) would fight each other. This constant conflict would prevent all but the very best laws from being passed -- the idea is that if everyone is arguing, only a really good idea will appease everyone.

The freedom of the press and the right to bear arms are an extension of that. The freedom of the press is guaranteed by the constitution because the media can expose corruption; the news is DESIGNED to be a part of our political system. As for the right to bear arms, the right to bear arms applies to militant applications to ensure that the government obeys the people and not the other way around. Keep in mind that when the bill of rights was written, we had just fought the English in a revolution, largely using civilian weaponry. The second amendment exists to prevent corruption. The people are supposed to be the best equipped fighting force.

Rights have to be taken and enforced, they cannot be given. If it can be given and taken away, it is a privilege, not a right. The constitution does not give us any rights, it is an agreement as to which rights we will collectively enforce. I believe that it is my god given RIGHT to protect myself. I WILL own weapons and NO LAW will ever prevent that. Anyone who disagrees will have to fight me, because as powerful as lawyers are, they are not as powerful as death.
44745 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
32 / M / So Cal
Offline
Posted 12/20/12 , edited 12/20/12

dark_paradox_21 wrote:

YOU ARE ALL WRONG!!!

You have NO idea why the second amendment exists in the US. The second amendment has NOTHING to do with defending yourself from everyday crime. That is not why the US constitution made sure to mention it. The US government was originally designed in such a way that opposing factions within the government (house, senate, president, and supreme court) would fight each other. This constant conflict would prevent all but the very best laws from being passed -- the idea is that if everyone is arguing, only a really good idea will appease everyone.

The freedom of the press and the right to bear arms are an extension of that. The freedom of the press is guaranteed by the constitution because the media can expose corruption; the news is DESIGNED to be a part of our political system. As for the right to bear arms, the right to bear arms applies to militant applications to ensure that the government obeys the people and not the other way around. Keep in mind that when the bill of rights was written, we had just fought the English in a revolution, largely using civilian weaponry. The second amendment exists to prevent corruption. The people are supposed to be the best equipped fighting force.

Rights have to be taken and enforced, they cannot be given. If it can be given and taken away, it is a privilege, not a right. The constitution does not give us any rights, it is an agreement as to which rights we will collectively enforce. I believe that it is my god given RIGHT to protect myself. I WILL own weapons and NO LAW will ever prevent that. Anyone who disagrees will have to fight me, because as powerful as lawyers are, they are not as powerful as death.


YOU ARE ALL WRONG!!!

2008 U.S. Supreme Court District of Columbia v. Heller (07-290)

http://www.law.cornell.edu/anncon/html/amdt2_user.html#amdt2_hd1

It's called the collective rights approach.

You have NO idea that the second amendment is debated by scholars and politicians alike.

Sorry I had to burst your bubble.
50511 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / M / United States
Offline
Posted 12/20/12
so concealed weapons are never a good idea. I man walks into a bank with a concealed gun...does the security gaurd know its a robbery or just a citizen concealing their weapon. It also makes it easier to walk into the bank without raising any alarms. Most police officers are injured by concealed weapons and gang members can carry weapons and not be arrested for it...

Owning a gun for protection is one thing but being able to conceal it legally is an entirely different story. The supreme court would not approve that in my opinoin and I am surprised any court would.
20218 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M / Texas
Offline
Posted 12/20/12
ummm you realize that criminals don't care about the law right? so in your argument, lets say concealed weapons are illegal, oh well, now the bank robber (who is a criminal breaking laws) can't conceal his weapon because the law says so...you realize how absurd that is right?
20218 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M / Texas
Offline
Posted 12/20/12



YOU ARE ALL WRONG!!!

2008 U.S. Supreme Court District of Columbia v. Heller (07-290)

http://www.law.cornell.edu/anncon/html/amdt2_user.html#amdt2_hd1

It's called the collective rights approach.

You have NO idea that the second amendment is debated by scholars and politicians alike.

Sorry I had to burst your bubble.


I think you are missed the part where he mentioned he didn't care what the law says, the right of self defense is not a privilege, thus cannot be taken away from the sovereign individual by the state because the state is not the power granting said right (its a natural/god given right). a large portion of gun owners agree with that sentiment.
44745 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
32 / M / So Cal
Offline
Posted 12/21/12

sarrukin wrote:




YOU ARE ALL WRONG!!!

2008 U.S. Supreme Court District of Columbia v. Heller (07-290)

http://www.law.cornell.edu/anncon/html/amdt2_user.html#amdt2_hd1

It's called the collective rights approach.

You have NO idea that the second amendment is debated by scholars and politicians alike.

Sorry I had to burst your bubble.


I think you are missed the part where he mentioned he didn't care what the law says, the right of self defense is not a privilege, thus cannot be taken away from the sovereign individual by the state because the state is not the power granting said right (its a natural/god given right). a large portion of gun owners agree with that sentiment.


I think you have missed the part where he said everyone was wrong and that they didn't know why the second amendment exists.

Sailor Candy Moderator
166806 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26
Offline
Posted 5/22/13
Spring forum cleaning! To keep the forums neat and tidy we only keep 6 months worth of threads since its May 22, 2013 [5/22/13] we will keep only keep posts open from December 22, 2012 [12/22/12]. Please feel free to recreate any thread closed, as long as someone else didn't open another similar one before you.
First  Prev  1  2  3  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.