CIVIL discussion on Current Issues. If you can't stay CIVIL, then please just stay out of this thread.

[Winco]

"Wouldn't it be great...? (i.e. Utopian thinking) isn't an argument.

Criminals gonna criminal, no matter what you think is great or not.

Then join the discussion.

Stop letting them out of prison.

Ok, third time I asked, why don't gun laws stop criminals from getting guns? Surely a civil debate should include answers to legitimate questions.

Because judges let them out.
I'm guessing liberal judges.

Hey, I gotta go out for a while.
I'm not dodging any questions.
So far so good.
Keep it going.

 

[miketx]

Why release them if you can't trust them?

That's what I say as well. If they can't be trusted when they get out, don't let them out.

 

[miketx]

Yes, we need guns to protect ourselves from people with guns.

I agree, so why do you want to disarm the law abiding?

 

[SavannahMann]

Shall not be infringed


/Thread

Ok. So you support allowing people who are out of Prison to get firearms?

 

[miketx]

So why don't gun laws stop criminals from getting guns?

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

I don't own any guns and cannot have a discussion on any particular components of such guns.

I support the 2A 100%, but it was written over 240 years ago.
Things have obviously changed since muzzleloaders.

We license fishing, cars, trucks, boats, trailers, businesses, etc
Cars and trucks weren't even invented yet, so there is obviously nothing in the Constitution about cars and trucks.

I believe that the criminals will always be criminals and will never abide by new or old laws.

So making background checks so they contain ZERO loopholes would not be an infringement.
How is getting a background check infringing. You're a Law Abiding Citizen.

That said, how would we ever patrol private guns sales.
We can't, so quit trying.

Pandora's box is wide open, so nothing will ever really change, I just wish we could stop arguing about it.

Law Abiding Citizens aren't the problem.

That's a small start.
Feel free to discuss this and other current issues.
But be CIVIL.

The problem is the unwillingness of far too many to consider firearm regulatory measures that don’t involve the regulation of specific types of weapons.

 

[2aguy]

Yes, we need guns to protect ourselves from people with guns.

Yep.

Bad guys use the tools that allow them to victimize people.....we need the same or better to stop them.....

 

[2aguy]

The problem is the unwillingness of far too many to consider firearm regulatory measures that don’t involve the regulation of specific types of weapons.

Yeah........be brave...name some.

 

[miketx]

Then join the discussion.

Because judges let them out.
I'm guessing liberal judges.

Hey, I gotta go out for a while.
I'm not dodging any questions.
So far so good.
Keep it going.

Why do you keep dodging the question? Why don't gun laws stop criminals from getting guns?

 

[August West]

We do...it is the democrat party that attacks the police and releases known, violent, repeat gun offenders........

How do we stop it? Stop voting for democrats.

It`s unlikely that the one who was released would have been locked up in the first place if he never had a gun. Do you think a vehicle has a second amendment right to have a gun overnight? Your law abiding friends gave guns to 625 criminals in Nashville during the first 5 months of this year and that`s only the ones reported. That`s only one (1) city.
That was the Democrats we watched beating up 130 cops in the Capitol?

Police: At least 625 guns have been stolen from vehicles across Nashville this year

Law enforcement officials in Music City are once again pleading with residents to lock their vehicles. The Metro Nashville Police Department says 873 firearms have been reported stolen in 2022. At least 625 of those guns were taken from vehicles. Just last week, 21 guns were stolen out of cars...

fox17.com

 

[miketx]

It`s unlikely that the one who was released would have been locked up in the first place if he never had a gun. Do you think a vehicle has a second amendment right to have a gun overnight? Your law abiding friends gave guns to 625 criminals in Nashville during the first 5 months of this year and that`s only the ones reported. That`s only one (1) city.
That was the Democrats we watched beating up 130 cops in the Capitol?

Police: At least 625 guns have been stolen from vehicles across Nashville this year

Law enforcement officials in Music City are once again pleading with residents to lock their vehicles. The Metro Nashville Police Department says 873 firearms have been reported stolen in 2022. At least 625 of those guns were taken from vehicles. Just last week, 21 guns were stolen out of cars...

fox17.com

Here we see another example about why we should not allow lying.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Yes, we need guns to protect ourselves from people with guns.

A/K/A the government

 

[koshergrl]

Guns are bad umkay ?

Blacks didn't think so when they fought long and hard to be afforded the right to use them to defend themselves.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

I respectfully disagree.
All law abiding citizens CARE about criminals getting guns.

Maybe the focus should be
"How to take away guns from Violent Criminals" not "Law Abiding Citizens"

Are you ok with infringing on the right to bear arms from violent convicted criminals.

If they’re a prohibited person, they have elected to forfeit that right.

 

[koshergrl]

Our right to bear arms has nothing to do with defending ourselves from bad guys, though that is a great side effect.
Our right to bear arms is specifically so that we can stop tyrannical government goons in their tracks. No matter how well they are armed.

 

[Darkwind]

The problem is the unwillingness of far too many to consider firearm regulatory measures that don’t involve the regulation of specific types of weapons.

No, the problem is that far too many people believe the government's infringement on natural rights is fair and reasonable.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

The problem is the unwillingness of far too many to consider firearm regulatory measures that don’t involve the regulation of specific types of weapons.

Ban and confiscate.

We WILL get machine guns because you deserve NOTHING!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

If they’re a prohibited person, they have elected to forfeit that right.

And must assume they will ignore such a prohibition. So, they can stay locked up until they prove to be trustworthy.

 

[miketx]

 

[BackAgain]

This is an attempt to have at least one thread where discussion remains civil.
No name calling or threats.
Just say I respectfully disagree.
If you can't do that, then just stick with the other threads.

I'll start. BackAgain

2nd Amendment:

A heated discussion topic.

U.S. Constitution - Second Amendment | Resources | Constitution Annotated | Congress.gov | Library of Congress

The original text of the Second Amendment of the Constitution of the United States.

constitution.congress.gov

I’m not sure what you’re starting. I see the TOPIC is the 2d Amendment. It is a topic that can generate a bit of heat.

Recognizing that, let me ask you: what in particular is it that you wish to discuss on the topic? I’ll start by guessing.

Maybe you’re wondering whether I would care to share my views on the 2d Amendment? Fine. I will start that process now:

I support the right of the people to possess arms. I do not believe that the prefatory words about the militia has anything to do with the right, now. It makes no sense to believe that a right to bear arms ( explicitly stated, albeit a pre-existing right of a free people ) which is meant to assure the people that the feared power of a central government cannot be wielded against them, would have to be contingent upon a militia the government controls.

It’s purpose is not hunting. That’s just a benefit of the explicit right. It is not even home defense, though of course that’s part of it. It’s purpose was understood at the time. That’s why the Bill of Rights was necessary to obtain ratification from the people.

One more thing at this early stage. Unlike some people, I am content with acknowledging some minimal qualifications in the right such as licensing and registration and related things like minimum age and no felony record. Just as the right to free speech is couched in absolute language, nevertheless we recognize some qualifications; so too I believe that the 2d Amendment allows for those minimal qualifiers.