Guns

[miketx]

I use them as penis extenders........... If you believe that I have a shitload of bridges for sale.........

I know right? I was at the range day and this gal said that the only reason I have guns is to make up for my shortcomings. I told her if that were true I'd never have bought a revolver with a 2 inch barrel.

 

[Road Runner]

You guys do it every 5 minutes, every day, every week, every month, every year, every decade, every century. So that issue is now resolved, no need for you to ever mention that again.

I'm here to cleanse Americans of their gun troubles.

How is that any of your business?

Come on progressive hunter , something about guns is troubling you. Maybe we can finally cover it so you don't have to mention it again. So what's your troubling gun point?

The only troubling thing I see so far is when somebody from another country thinks they know how to run ours and won't shut up about it.

I'm not anti gun, I just find the gun nut brigade regurgitating the same old gun shite every five seconds nauseating.

Then why not ignore those threads?

We don;t have a gun problem.

If somebody tried to take my gun away from me there would be a problem,.. but it wouldn't be mine. (And yes I do believe that you can shoot somebody who is trying to take your gun for in fear that they would use your own gun on you.)

 

[...]

When, where and how has that been shown to be very dangerous?

You mean people with AR15s running pulling mass shootings?

 

[...]

"The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed".

Feel free to show us where the Constitution says otherwise.

Five types of gun laws the Founding Fathers loved

A leading historian of constitutional thought says the contemporary Second Amendment debate is founded on serious misunderstandings.

theconversation.com

Read that, study up on early American gun control and somewhere in there you'll also find that post Revolution, the only people that could carry a rifle with a bayonet lug were standing members of the sanctioned local militia, most of whom were veterans anyway.

Our constitution has been bastardized by gun thugs and crooked NRA leadership and dishonest politicians.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

No, the part that doesn't get into your skull is there is no such thing as the " right people".

That is a class statement. Everyone is the " right people" here, until they break the law.

That gets down to one of the essential differences between the backward British culture, as well as many of the other backward European cultures, and American culture.

In much of Europe, there are royalty and their are various levels of nobility, in which a person's worth is established by what family he was born into, or what titles have been bestowed upon him by the royals. That is one of the principles which we rejected in founding this nation, which is stated in our Declaration of Independence as “all men are created equal”.

In America, you do not get to be better than anyone else, just for having been born into the right families. We don't have kings and princes and dukes and knights and counts and all that other feudal bullshit.

In America, the only way you get to be better or worse than anyone else is by the choices that you make. The way you get to be the “right people” is by being a good citizen, by working at an honest job to make an honest living, by doing things that contribute to society as a whole, and by refraining from criminal behavior.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Our constitution has been bastardized by gun thugs and crooked NRA leadership and dishonest politicians.

So, what you are saying, here, is that our Constitution has been “bastardized” to mean exactly what it explicitly and unambiguously says?

 

[miketx]

Our constitution has been bastardized by gun thugs and crooked NRA leadership and dishonest politicians.

It says the same thing it said in the beginning you lying commie bastard.

 

[Wild Bill Kelsoe]

Five types of gun laws the Founding Fathers loved

A leading historian of constitutional thought says the contemporary Second Amendment debate is founded on serious misunderstandings.

theconversation.com

Read that, study up on early American gun control and somewhere in there you'll also find that post Revolution, the only people that could carry a rifle with a bayonet lug were standing members of the sanctioned local militia, most of whom were veterans anyway.

Our constitution has been bastardized by gun thugs and crooked NRA leadership and dishonest politicians.

Feel free to show us where any of that is in the Constitution?

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

What it is, the deflection from the topic is,

Which is what conservatives do on this and other topics, the consequence of their cowardice and dishonesty – red herring fallacies, deflections, and lies.

Conservatives are also demagogues – contriving and propagating lies about guns being ‘banned’ and ‘confiscated.’

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

How is that any of your business?





The only troubling thing I see so far is when somebody from another country thinks they know how to run ours and won't shut up about it.




Then why not ignore those threads?





If somebody tried to take my gun away from me there would be a problem,.. but it wouldn't be mine. (And yes I do believe that you can shoot somebody who is trying to take your gun for in fear that they would use your own gun on you.)



View attachment 611259

As if on cue…

A conservative lying about guns being ‘taken away.’

 

[Wild Bill Kelsoe]

As if on cue…

A conservative lying about guns being ‘taken away.’

Anyone who says the objective ISNT to outright ban guns is either stupid, or lying.

 

[Road Runner]

Anyone who says the objective ISNT to outright ban guns is either stupid, or lying.

Or both.

 

[2aguy]

Five types of gun laws the Founding Fathers loved

A leading historian of constitutional thought says the contemporary Second Amendment debate is founded on serious misunderstandings.

theconversation.com

Read that, study up on early American gun control and somewhere in there you'll also find that post Revolution, the only people that could carry a rifle with a bayonet lug were standing members of the sanctioned local militia, most of whom were veterans anyway.

Our constitution has been bastardized by gun thugs and crooked NRA leadership and dishonest politicians.

15 million innocent men, women and children murdered across Europe in 6 years by socialists....and you push gun control as a good idea? You truly are stupidl.

Gun registration leads to gun confiscation...we know this from actual human history.....

Gun carrying was an accepted practice throughout the U.S.....even in colonial days, the only people who weren't allowed to own and carry guns? Slaves and native Americans......how'd that turn out for them?

Stand your Ground laws came about because fascists like you would persecute innocent people who defended themselves from violent criminals.....so laws had to be created to keep the victims safe from fascists like you...who would charge them and put them in prison for the act of fighting off violent criminals....Self Defense is not allowed in Britain.......we choose to allow normal people to stop violent monsters from committing rape, robbery, murder, beatings and stabbings....

A woman is grabbed by a violent serial rapist at a bus stop, a train platform or in her apartment...he plans on beating, raping and murdering her. She has a gun, and can stop the rape with the gun......

Do you want her to use that gun to stop the rape?

A woman stops an attack with a gun, a brutal rape, torture and murder...in a public space....if you had the ability to go back in time, and prevent her from having that gun...would you?

Can you answer these questions? I doubt it, anti-gun fascists like you never do.....

Safe storage laws are simply a means to criminalize gun owning by normal people......it will start out as a simple fine, then fascists like you will incrementally make it so burdensome, through fines, and red tape, that the poor will be unable to comply with storing their guns according to the expensive, prohibitive laws you will then create........any law you pass is simply a first step to more and more red tape and legal jeopardy to make people stop buying, owning and carrying guns...

We know who you are, we know what you want, we know your tricks......

This guy from your link should actually read the Heller decision...where they actually go through all of the history of the Right to own and carry guns in this country.....

From our review of founding-era sources, we conclude that this natural meaning was also the meaning that “bear arms” had in the 18th century. In numerous in stances, “bear arms” was unambiguously used to refer to the carrying of weapons outside of an organized militia. The most prominent examples are those most relevant to the Second Amendment: Nine state constitutional provi sions written in the 18th century or the first two decades of the 19th, which enshrined a right of citizens to “bear arms in defense of themselves and the state” or “bear arms in defense of himself and the state.”8 It is clear from those formulations that “bear arms” did not refer only to carry
ing a weapon in an organized military unit. Justice James Wilson interpreted the Pennsylvania Constitution’s arms- bearing right, for example, as a recognition of the natural right of defense “of one’s person or house”—what he called the law of “self preservation.” 2 Collected Works of James Wilson 1142, and n. x (K. Hall & M. Hall eds. 2007) (citing Pa. Const., Art. IX, §21 (1790)); see also T. Walker, Intro duction to American Law 198 (1837) (“Thus the right of self-defence [is] guaranteed by the [Ohio] constitution”); see also id., at 157 (equating Second Amendment with that provision of the Ohio Constitution). That was also the interpretation of those state constitutional provisions adopted by pre-Civil War state courts.9 These provisions demonstrate—again, in the most analogous linguistic context—that “bear arms” was not limited to the carrying of arms in a militia.
----

In a 1780 debate in the House of Lords, for example, Lord Richmond described an order to disarm private citizens (not militia members) as “a violation of the constitutional right of Protestant subjects to keep and bear arms for their own defense.” 49 The London Magazine or Gentle man’s Monthly Intelligencer 467 (1780). In response, another member of Parliament referred to “the right of bearing arms for personal defence,” making clear that no special military meaning for “keep and bear arms” was intended in the discussion. Id., at 467–468.15
------

They accordingly obtained an assurance from Wil liam and Mary, in the Declaration of Right (which was codified as the English Bill of Rights), that Protestants
would never be disarmed: “That the subjects which are Protestants may have arms for their defense suitable to their conditions and as allowed by law.” 1 W. & M., c. 2, §7, in 3 Eng. Stat. at Large 441 (1689). This right has long been understood to be the predecessor to our Second Amendment. See E. Dumbauld, The Bill of Rights and What It Means Today 51 (1957); W. Rawle, A View of the Constitution of the United States of America 122 (1825) (hereinafter Rawle). It was clearly an individual right, having nothing whatever to do with service in a militia. To be sure, it was an individual right not available to the whole population, given that it was restricted to Protes tants, and like all written English rights it was held only against the Crown, not Parliament. See Schwoerer, To Hold and Bear Arms: The English Perspective, in Bogus 207, 218; but see 3 J. Story, Commentaries on the Consti tution of the United States §1858 (1833) (hereinafter Story) (contending that the “right to bear arms” is a “limi tatio[n] upon the power of parliament” as well). But it was secured to them as individuals, according to “libertarian political principles,” not as members of a fighting force. Schwoerer, Declaration of Rights, at 283; see also id., at 78; G. Jellinek, The Declaration of the Rights of Man and of Citizens 49, and n. 7 (1901) (reprinted 1979).

By the time of the founding, the right to have arms had become fundamental for English subjects. See Malcolm 122–134. Blackstone, whose works, we have said, “consti tuted the preeminent authority on English law for the founding generation,” Alden v. Maine, 527 U. S. 706, 715 (1999), cited the arms provision of the Bill of Rights as one of the fundamental rights of Englishmen.
See 1 Black- stone 136, 139–140 (1765). His description of it cannot possibly be thought to tie it to militia or military service. It was, he said, “the natural right of resistance and self- preservation,” id., at 139, and “the right of having and using arms for self-preservation and defence,” id., at 140;

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/07pdf/07-290.pdf

 

[Captain Caveman]

I use them as penis extenders........... If you believe that I have a shitload of bridges for sale.........

Yes, you will. Guns in America are a macho thing and blokes need to compensate because you're a nation of tiny penises.

 

[Captain Caveman]

Which is what conservatives do on this and other topics, the consequence of their cowardice and dishonesty – red herring fallacies, deflections, and lies.

Conservatives are also demagogues – contriving and propagating lies about guns being ‘banned’ and ‘confiscated.’

I'm conservative and I know idiots in society with guns is a bad recipe. Guns have a time and place.

 

[westwall]

I'm conservative and I know idiots in society with guns is a bad recipe. Guns have a time and place.

And that time is now, and that place is everywhere bad people try and hurt good people.

 

[Captain Caveman]

15 million innocent men, women and children murdered across Europe in 6 years by socialists....and you push gun control as a good idea? You truly are stupidl.

Gun registration leads to gun confiscation...we know this from actual human history.....

Gun carrying was an accepted practice throughout the U.S.....even in colonial days, the only people who weren't allowed to own and carry guns? Slaves and native Americans......how'd that turn out for them?

Stand your Ground laws came about because fascists like you would persecute innocent people who defended themselves from violent criminals.....so laws had to be created to keep the victims safe from fascists like you...who would charge them and put them in prison for the act of fighting off violent criminals....Self Defense is not allowed in Britain.......we choose to allow normal people to stop violent monsters from committing rape, robbery, murder, beatings and stabbings....

A woman is grabbed by a violent serial rapist at a bus stop, a train platform or in her apartment...he plans on beating, raping and murdering her. She has a gun, and can stop the rape with the gun......

Do you want her to use that gun to stop the rape?

A woman stops an attack with a gun, a brutal rape, torture and murder...in a public space....if you had the ability to go back in time, and prevent her from having that gun...would you?

Can you answer these questions? I doubt it, anti-gun fascists like you never do.....

Safe storage laws are simply a means to criminalize gun owning by normal people......it will start out as a simple fine, then fascists like you will incrementally make it so burdensome, through fines, and red tape, that the poor will be unable to comply with storing their guns according to the expensive, prohibitive laws you will then create........any law you pass is simply a first step to more and more red tape and legal jeopardy to make people stop buying, owning and carrying guns...

We know who you are, we know what you want, we know your tricks......

This guy from your link should actually read the Heller decision...where they actually go through all of the history of the Right to own and carry guns in this country.....

From our review of founding-era sources, we conclude that this natural meaning was also the meaning that “bear arms” had in the 18th century. In numerous in stances, “bear arms” was unambiguously used to refer to the carrying of weapons outside of an organized militia. The most prominent examples are those most relevant to the Second Amendment: Nine state constitutional provi sions written in the 18th century or the first two decades of the 19th, which enshrined a right of citizens to “bear arms in defense of themselves and the state” or “bear arms in defense of himself and the state.”8 It is clear from those formulations that “bear arms” did not refer only to carry
ing a weapon in an organized military unit. Justice James Wilson interpreted the Pennsylvania Constitution’s arms- bearing right, for example, as a recognition of the natural right of defense “of one’s person or house”—what he called the law of “self preservation.” 2 Collected Works of James Wilson 1142, and n. x (K. Hall & M. Hall eds. 2007) (citing Pa. Const., Art. IX, §21 (1790)); see also T. Walker, Intro duction to American Law 198 (1837) (“Thus the right of self-defence [is] guaranteed by the [Ohio] constitution”); see also id., at 157 (equating Second Amendment with that provision of the Ohio Constitution). That was also the interpretation of those state constitutional provisions adopted by pre-Civil War state courts.9 These provisions demonstrate—again, in the most analogous linguistic context—that “bear arms” was not limited to the carrying of arms in a militia.
----

In a 1780 debate in the House of Lords, for example, Lord Richmond described an order to disarm private citizens (not militia members) as “a violation of the constitutional right of Protestant subjects to keep and bear arms for their own defense.” 49 The London Magazine or Gentle man’s Monthly Intelligencer 467 (1780). In response, another member of Parliament referred to “the right of bearing arms for personal defence,” making clear that no special military meaning for “keep and bear arms” was intended in the discussion. Id., at 467–468.15
------

They accordingly obtained an assurance from Wil liam and Mary, in the Declaration of Right (which was codified as the English Bill of Rights), that Protestants
would never be disarmed: “That the subjects which are Protestants may have arms for their defense suitable to their conditions and as allowed by law.” 1 W. & M., c. 2, §7, in 3 Eng. Stat. at Large 441 (1689). This right has long been understood to be the predecessor to our Second Amendment. See E. Dumbauld, The Bill of Rights and What It Means Today 51 (1957); W. Rawle, A View of the Constitution of the United States of America 122 (1825) (hereinafter Rawle). It was clearly an individual right, having nothing whatever to do with service in a militia. To be sure, it was an individual right not available to the whole population, given that it was restricted to Protes tants, and like all written English rights it was held only against the Crown, not Parliament. See Schwoerer, To Hold and Bear Arms: The English Perspective, in Bogus 207, 218; but see 3 J. Story, Commentaries on the Consti tution of the United States §1858 (1833) (hereinafter Story) (contending that the “right to bear arms” is a “limi tatio[n] upon the power of parliament” as well). But it was secured to them as individuals, according to “libertarian political principles,” not as members of a fighting force. Schwoerer, Declaration of Rights, at 283; see also id., at 78; G. Jellinek, The Declaration of the Rights of Man and of Citizens 49, and n. 7 (1901) (reprinted 1979).

By the time of the founding, the right to have arms had become fundamental for English subjects. See Malcolm 122–134. Blackstone, whose works, we have said, “consti tuted the preeminent authority on English law for the founding generation,” Alden v. Maine, 527 U. S. 706, 715 (1999), cited the arms provision of the Bill of Rights as one of the fundamental rights of Englishmen.
See 1 Black- stone 136, 139–140 (1765). His description of it cannot possibly be thought to tie it to militia or military service. It was, he said, “the natural right of resistance and self- preservation,” id., at 139, and “the right of having and using arms for self-preservation and defence,” id., at 140;

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/07pdf/07-290.pdf

Founding fathers, Rinse, Wash, Repeat.

 

[OhPleaseJustQuit]

Yes, you will. Guns in America are a macho thing and blokes need to compensate because you're a nation of tiny penises.

Right.

I am a woman and I began my firearms instruction in Montana. While I was learning to shoot, I paid attention to what the men were saying. Every "good old boy" I asked agreed that women are far better shooters than men. I moved from the west coast to the Midwest several months ago and I make it a point to talk to women in my new town about how they feel about firearms. I knew when I moved here that all the men would be shooters, but guess what! So are all the women I've talked to. Our governor (see photo) is well known for her hunting skills.

Your "macho" theory of gun ownership and use is complete bullshit.

 

[Captain Caveman]

And that time is now, and that place is everywhere bad people try and hurt good people.

No. You don't need guns for protection, that's a fallacy. A criminal is someone who breaks the law in a criminal way. That can be done in hundreds of ways. Just thinking it's by a gun and a gun alone, just shows you how fucking retarded that person is. In fact, gun crime struggles to represent 0.1% of crime. And even then, it's normally between people who they know or gangs.

You can enjoy guns by pigeon shooting, grouse shooting and target ranges. You don't have enemies going after you so this fallacy of family protection is beyond ridiculous.

If your country needs protected, you have an army, not domestic retards like you.

 

[Captain Caveman]

Right.

View attachment 611425

I am a woman and I began my firearms instruction in Montana. While I was learning to shoot, I paid attention to what the men were saying. Every "good old boy" I asked agreed that women are far better shooters than men. I moved from the west coast to the Midwest several months ago and I make it a point to talk to women in my new town about how they feel about firearms. I knew when I moved here that all the men would be shooters, but guess what! So are all the women I've talked to. Our governor (see photo) is well known for her hunting skills.

Your "macho" theory of gun ownership and use is complete bullshit.

In women, the macho is wide on's.

Don't forget to polish your gun, hoover up and make sandwiches.