Honest and open debate on gun control

[MikeK]

It's not a contest. At one time I had well over 500 firearms. Now I'm down to a couple hundred. I've kept the rare and unusual.

While some might regard your appreciation of firearms as some sort of quirk, if I could afford to, and if I had the protected space, I think I would own a lot of guns, too. Probably not five hundred, but quite a few.

My father was a locksmith by trade but he also did very well as an sideline gunsmith, so my brother and I grew up around firearms and learned to appreciate the skill and ingenuity that devised and created them. At one time I personally owned fourteen guns but lost interest in them as my interest in archery increased. Now I'm down to just two, which I keep for personal defense, But I still enjoy going to the range now and then and making some noise.

 

[westwall]

It's not a contest. At one time I had well over 500 firearms. Now I'm down to a couple hundred. I've kept the rare and unusual.

While some might regard your appreciation of firearms as some sort of quirk, if I could afford to, and if I had the protected space, I think I would own a lot of guns, too. Probably not five hundred, but quite a few.

My father was a locksmith by trade but he also did very well as an sideline gunsmith, so my brother and I grew up around firearms and learned to appreciate the skill and ingenuity that devised and created them. At one time I personally owned fourteen guns but lost interest in them as my interest in archery increased. Now I'm down to just two, which I keep for personal defense, But I still enjoy going to the range now and then and making some noise.

What is funny is that many of the largest gun collections are owned by the very people who want to deny their ownership to the poor and middle class. Gun control IS class warfare.

 

[Ame®icano]

Above the Constitution? That's pretty vague. I hope you're not talking about natural rights bestowed by God, because those aren't codified in law. The Constitution is exactly what Second Amendment advocates need to rely on, we'd have nothing without it.

I think he was thinking of Declaration of Independence that led us to The Constitution.

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are life, liberty and pursuit of happiness."

The Constitution doesn't give right to life, otherwise we wouldn't have capital punishment, and we wouldn't be talking about abortions or euthanasia or self defense. What Constitution gives is Bill of Rights, or civil liberties, to live your life the way you want, to make your own choices, free from government. Those personal liberties are basically what makes life and if you have them, you also have a right to life.

 

[2aguy]

As has been stated, the Costitution and Bill of Rights don't grant us rights....we already have them....the Constitution and the Bill of Rights simply list those rights for easy recall......for those statists who just don't understand that concept.....

 

[MikeK]

You realize the country didn't get out of the Depression..right? That what he did deepened and lengthened the depression. Had he just let the economy work...we would have been out of the depression long before World War 2. Raising taxes, raising tarrifs, screwing with the economy and wasting tax money....wrecked any chance at coming out of the depression....

You can keep believing that if you wish to but the fact is FDR pulled the Nation out of the Depression by the simple trick of redistributing some of the wealth hoarded by a small percentage of individuals -- a situation which is rather similar to that which exists today. He did it by creating make-work programs, which put money in the pockets of millions, who spent it, which created businesses, which in turn created more jobs, which in turn created an industrial revolution and gave rise to the Middle Class that I watched take form.

I wish my father, my mother, and my aunts and uncles were still alive and able to talk to you about those Depression years and how FDR managed to turn them around. I lived through it, too, but while I was too young to understand what was happening I do have vague recollection of how the People loved and praised FDR.

It is important to understand that today's wealth-hoarders, the Kochs and a growing legion of multi-billionaires, are vigorously determined to disseminate anti-socialist propaganda, to fabricate lies and to distort history for the express purpose of avoiding another cycle of redistribution -- which is desperately needed to revive the American economy and re-energize the Middle Class.

 

[2aguy]

You realize the country didn't get out of the Depression..right? That what he did deepened and lengthened the depression. Had he just let the economy work...we would have been out of the depression long before World War 2. Raising taxes, raising tarrifs, screwing with the economy and wasting tax money....wrecked any chance at coming out of the depression....

You can keep believing that if you wish to but the fact is FDR pulled the Nation out of the Depression by the simple trick of redistributing some of the wealth hoarded by a small percentage of individuals -- a situation which is rather similar to that which exists today. He did it by creating make-work programs, which put money in the pockets of millions, who spent it, which created businesses, which in turn created more jobs, which in turn created an industrial revolution and gave rise to the Middle Class that I watched take form.

I wish my father, my mother, and my aunts and uncles were still alive and able to talk to you about those Depression years and how FDR managed to turn them around. I lived through it, too, but while I was too young to understand what was happening I do have vague recollection of how the People loved and praised FDR.

It is important to understand that today's wealth-hoarders, the Kochs and a growing legion of multi-billionaires, are vigorously determined to disseminate anti-socialist propaganda, to fabricate lies and to distort history for the express purpose of avoiding another cycle of redistribution -- which is desperately needed to revive the American economy and re-energize the Middle Class.

What part of that high unemployment rate that was over 17 % after years of his mess is geting past you....? Taking money from one person and just giving it to another to spend does not stimulate an economy...getting out of the way of people who know how to make things creates actual jobs and creates real money....that ends a depression....my Grandparents lived through the depression and bought the FDR hagiography...but he was an asshole....who wrecked the economy and kept it wrecked.....

Your teachers are evil.....do not listen to them....they are either lying to you or they have no clue about the truth....


You have been told the truth,, now go and discover it for yourself...or you will just be another statist slave....

 

[Ame®icano]

Come on guys, stay on topic. Gun control.

Now, since you mentioned FDR, he also tried a gun control. As typical progressive (equivalent to European communist at the time), he wanted to control everything, so why not to control guns. In 1938 Congress legislated that gun dealers had to obtain a Federal Firearms Licenses and maintain names and addresses of those they sold their weapons to. I guess he knew his policies were not working very well.

 

[2aguy]

You realize the country didn't get out of the Depression..right? That what he did deepened and lengthened the depression. Had he just let the economy work...we would have been out of the depression long before World War 2. Raising taxes, raising tarrifs, screwing with the economy and wasting tax money....wrecked any chance at coming out of the depression....

You can keep believing that if you wish to but the fact is FDR pulled the Nation out of the Depression by the simple trick of redistributing some of the wealth hoarded by a small percentage of individuals -- a situation which is rather similar to that which exists today. He did it by creating make-work programs, which put money in the pockets of millions, who spent it, which created businesses, which in turn created more jobs, which in turn created an industrial revolution and gave rise to the Middle Class that I watched take form.

I wish my father, my mother, and my aunts and uncles were still alive and able to talk to you about those Depression years and how FDR managed to turn them around. I lived through it, too, but while I was too young to understand what was happening I do have vague recollection of how the People loved and praised FDR.

It is important to understand that today's wealth-hoarders, the Kochs and a growing legion of multi-billionaires, are vigorously determined to disseminate anti-socialist propaganda, to fabricate lies and to distort history for the express purpose of avoiding another cycle of redistribution -- which is desperately needed to revive the American economy and re-energize the Middle Class.

They don't hoard wealth...they invest it in businesses that create jobs and make more money......you are being lied to......take a chance....read Hayek's Raod to Serfdom, Bastiat's The Law....Von Mises.....Rand.......

 

[2aguy]

Come on guys, stay on topic. Gun control.

Now, since you mentioned FDR, he also tried a gun control. As typical progressive (equivalent to European communist at the time), he wanted to control everything, so why not to control guns. In 1938 Congress legislated that gun dealers had to obtain a Federal Firearms Licenses and maintain names and addresses of those they sold their weapons to. I guess he knew his policies were not working very well.

I agree but someone this confused needs guidance...on the spot...and when he grows up and realizes his mistake...just like Thomas Sowell did, then he can thank me later....

Oh Yeah...Read Thomas Sowell, and Walter Williams....and Read and watch Milton Friedman...see the Milton Friedman youtube video when he was on the phil donahue show.....that was great...

 

[Ame®icano]

Define "Well Regulated".

That is easier to do if we substitute the words organized and trained for the word, regulated," which was a component of a seventeenth century vocabulary. Just keep in mind that the Second Amendment protects the People's right to "keep and bear," not the militia's, and it's easier to understand.

If we are relegated to regard the 2nd amendment in 18th century terms, we should remember the state of weapon technology during the 18th century.

I have no problem with our remembering the state of weapon technology during the 18th century.

The citizens were armed with the same weapons that the finest armies in the world carried.

The finest armies had rockets, mortar bombs and ships of the line with cannons.

How many citizens had those weapons?

Missed the history classes in high school? Citizens did have those weapons, government even hire them to wage war on Barbary pirates. Also reading the Article 1, Section 8, Clause 11 of The Constitution could help.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Ok, you have no suggestions or goals. You just wanted to make a point having nothing to do with the thread. Consider it made.

I have plenty of suggestions. You could go an read my post where I made plenty of suggestions.

However for some reason no one chose to respond to my suggestions at all.

What I was doing was getting past first base in which some people seemed to have a problem with what was being spoken about. So that was clarification.

I take it you agree with me.

 

[ErikViking]

They will not be issued equipment? Any equipment issued will be taken back if the condition of mental stability isn't met.

You don't understand what is being asked of you.

A criminal will get a gun regardless of what equipment you issue. How does your issuing equipment prevent the criminal from getting the gun?

Yes, I know, I misunderstood. The problem isn't to get the right people guns, it's to prevent the wrong people to get them.

 

[frigidweirdo]

There was no response because it is irrelevant. That something can be limited does not mean it should be limited. You do not limit something just for the sake of limiting it. The argument that nuclear weapons can't be owned by citizens therefore magazines should be limited to 9 cartridges is absurd. So bring it out of the rafters and:

1 - State what you want to accomplish
2 - State your plan for accomplishing it
3 - Support that your plan will accomplish it

It's relevant. It's the facts of the thing.

If something can be limited it's relevant. If you have the right, it's not limitable.

Also, I didn't make the argument about nukes to magazines. You brought that up. Again, I was stating the facts. If you understand what something means, you will then make the right conclusions. If you don't understand, then you will make the wrong conclusions.

So, do I take it that you agree with what I have said, regardless of whether you want to be pedantic about whether you think it's relevant or not?

Forgot to respond to your last question. Of course it is limited. There is no such thing as an unlimited right. Now what?

And the first part of my question was that whether you agree or not. So, again, I take it you agree with everything I have said.

Now, you can go look at post 149 where I made suggestions on how to reduce gun violence

Honest and open debate on gun control Page 15 US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

It's here in case you're too lazy to go look for yourself.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Short attention span? Read Article 1, Section 8 of The Constitution. Enumerated powers of federal government. Do you see gun control there? I don't. Therefore, it's unconstitutional.

You gun fetishists really don't have a clue!

Even the wording of the 2nd Amendment includes the term "well regulated" which gives the government the constitutional right to pass gun control laws.

Your ignorance of the Constitution is staggering.

 

[Derideo_Te]

There are registries of voters. Are they unconstitutional? Has anyone had their vote taken away because they are registered to vote? How is registering gun owners any different to registering voters?
Onus remains on you to prove that it is unconstitutional.

Let me ask you... who keeps those registers, federal or state government?

What difference does that make? State governments are no different in principle to the federal government.

 

[Derideo_Te]

There is also Article 1, Section 8, Clause 11 that gives authority to Congress to authorize privately owned armed ships to make war on the enemies of the United States. Basically, according to The Constitution, you can have dangerous and unusual weapons such as battleship, or tank, or machine gun. The regulations of those weapons are again, by The Constitution, left to the states, as it should be.

Utter nonsense!

You are taking that provision completely out of context.

 

[Ame®icano]

You gun fetishists really don't have a clue!

Even the wording of the 2nd Amendment includes the term "well regulated" which gives the government the constitutional right to pass gun control laws.

Your ignorance of the Constitution is staggering.

You took two words out of whole amendment. Well regulated what??? Well regulated militia, you idiot.

"A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

You can't read? Why militia is needed? It also says in the text.

"A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

For security of a free state. Free from tyrannical government.

You misses this part... People have a right to keep and bear arms.

"A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

And finally part that you statists keep ignoring, the federal government have no right to mingle with that right.

"A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

Which part of "shall not be infringed" you do not understand?

So you only see two words, well regulated... those two words are all you care about. Those two words gave you all the knowledge you need about The Constitution. Have you read the rest of it? Not important...

But what The Constitution says about "well regulated". Have you check maybe Article 1, Section 8, Clause 16 where Constitution gives Congress the authority to demand that able bodied males be armed. Here is some reading material for you... Library of Congress.
Congress passed the law that required all able-bodied male citizens between 18 and 45 to enroll in their State Militia, get a gun and ammunition, and train.

 

[Ame®icano]

Let me ask you... who keeps those registers, federal or state government?

What difference does that make? State governments are no different in principle to the federal government.

This is fucking hilarious.

 

[westwall]

There is also Article 1, Section 8, Clause 11 that gives authority to Congress to authorize privately owned armed ships to make war on the enemies of the United States. Basically, according to The Constitution, you can have dangerous and unusual weapons such as battleship, or tank, or machine gun. The regulations of those weapons are again, by The Constitution, left to the states, as it should be.

Utter nonsense!

You are taking that provision completely out of context.

No he's not. The context is correct. The US government had a very small standing army so relied on the citizenry to make up the difference. That included artillery.

You can certainly whine that you don't agree but the facts are against you.

 

[Darkwind]