Why 2nd Amendment supporters who support mandatory training are wrong….

[Foxfyre]

That makes you against the 2nd Amendment.

No it doesn't. But then I have learned that there are more perspectives and points of view and ways to approach problems than just the group think anarchist one.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

No it doesn't. But then I have learned that there are more perspectives and points of view and ways to approach problems than just the group think anarchist one.

You don't support the 2nd Amendment by what you say, dumbass. We all see through your charade.

 

[Foxfyre]

You don't support the 2nd Amendment by what you say, dumbass. We all see through your charade.

Well if you think that constitutes civil debate I'll leave you to it. Have a great evening.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Well if you think that constitutes civil debate I'll leave you to it. Have a great evening.

You have no concept of civil debate. You are simply a dumbass who cannot see that your position is unconstitutional.

 

[Flash]

There's no way to know that pothead is out there though or a danger to you.

Bullshit! Pot is a mind altering drug and it will cause impairment.

If you were really for public safety you would be for banning the drug.

Just like alcohol and other things. I have a swimming pool in my back yard. More people die each each drowning than are killed by AR-15s.

 

[Foxfyre]

Bullshit! Pot is a mind altering drug and it will cause impairment.

If you were really for public safety you would be for banning the drug.

Just like alcohol and other things. I have a swimming pool in my back yard. More people die each each drowning than are killed by AR-15s.

Flash this isn't a thread about pot or potheads. It's about the second amendment and whether gun should be regulated in any way. Please try to keep up.

 

[Failzero]

And forcing blacks to pass a Literacy Test before voting works for you too?

No but Voter ID and only voting for your party in Primaries and ending Mail in for Non Military works for me

 

[Failzero]

Your unreasonable opposition to reasonable gun control means you ARE responsible for the bad acts of others.

Want a firearm for your home, I'm ll for it.
Want to carry a concealed firearm after training, cool.
But
Want to strap 4 guns to your waist and parade around wal Mart threatening everyone who sees you?
Want to own a dozen AR and another dozen Glocks?

Then be prepared to the blowback.
Reason is met with reason.
Extremism will be met with extremism.

It really is that simple.

An Individual should be able to Have a Carry Permit , own 21 Glocks 6 1911s and 37 other various pistols , 27 AR Pattern 6 FAL Pattern and 11 AK / AKM Pattern Weapons and a few Shotguns and.a Deer Rifle

 

[Failzero]

That's what all the lefties want.

In NYC just to keep a revolver in your home or apartment, it takes 3-6 months of paperwork and up to $600 in fees.

That isn't even concealed carry.

Is that infringement or not?

My California CCW is 12+ Hours of Training & classroom , I must qualify with each weapon on my CCW every 2 years with Renewal , Initial is 150.00$ for Class and 165.00 for Sheriff . ( Shasta County )

 

[Cellblock2429]

You can't see the end of your nose for the ignorance and stupidity blocking your vision.

/——/ What part of the post is untrue? Do you have anything other than insults?

 

[Blues Man]

A well regulated militia being necessary for the security of a free state

Makes it clear they intended the militia to provide for our security and answerable to the states

Yes the Founders disliked the idea of a standing army.

But the main clause of the 2nd is all about the right of the people as are all the amendments in the bill of rights.

There is no requirement implied or otherwise that any of the people be in the active militia before they can keep and carry firearms.

 

[Blues Man]

There was a time when solving the problem was more important than blaming the other side.
Elected officials no longer seem to want to solve problems, rather, they'd rather blame the other side than fix it.

It is sad to see and if we can't begin to work together to solve problems rather than fight over who's to blame this democracy will end sooner rather than later.

You people just don't get that the gun crime problem has nothing to do with the vast majority of law abiding gun owners.

Most people who commit crimes with guns are already prohibited by law from possessing firearms.

Accidental gun deaths are not even statistically significant when you take into account that there are literally tens of millions of legal gun uses annually and that up to 60% of all Americans own firearms.

The average gun owner is not the problem

 

[Blues Man]

My California CCW is 12+ Hours of Training & classroom , I must qualify with each weapon on my CCW every 2 years with Renewal , Initial is 150.00$ for Class and 165.00 for Sheriff . ( Shasta County )

That's no different than a poll tax

 

[Blues Man]

Basically I agree with you. And it is sad that angry and destructive partisan politics overrides common sense as the norm these days and pretty well prevents common sense solutions so that everybody's important needs can be met.

You see I don't want my crazy neighbor who gets drunk on Saturday nights and does a whole lot of angry, stupid, dangerous sh*t having access to a machine gun and ammo or a fully armed piece of artillery. So how do I protect myself and my neighbors without violating the Second Amendment?

This would be an extreme case of course--and it is only an analogy as I'm pretty sure all my neighbors could be trusted with a machine gun or a 105mm recoilless rifle--but somehow there has to be a way to deal with things like that. We sure don't want those machine guns or artillery pieces in the hands of gang members or other lawless individuals or in a bar where fist and knife fights between angry drunks are common. There has to be some reasonable regulation that does not infringe on constitutional liberties.

Most places have a law that prohibits using a firearm while intoxicated. So you call the cops and maybe they'll show up.

And FYI not that many people own machine guns

 

[Grau]

And the democrats thought it was "reasonable," to require blacks to pass a literacy test for voting......do you agree with what they did for that?

No, of course I don't support racist measures like literacy tests for just Blacks or "common sense gun control for the children".

I'm aware that many gun control proponents will not stop until every law abiding citizen is disarmed.

The way they hope to accomplish this is through incremental "common sense gun control laws for the children" and vague schemes like mandatory gun training which will eventually be a condition for simple gun ownership and then the training courses will become so expensive that only the wealthy can afford to own firearms.

Americans are not going to loose their 2nd Amendment rights all at once but they will loose them slowly and incrementally, one "common sense" law after another.

Thanks,

 

[miketx]

Rights always come with restrictions. You have freedom of speech. But you can claim freedom of speech if you are on top of an overturned police car with a flaming bottle in hand shouting Charge!

You have freedom of Religion, but you can’t sacrifice Virgins at midnight and claim Religious Freedom.

You have the right to peaceably assemble. But the jurisdiction you are at may require you to take certain precautions and get enough Porta Johns to maintain sanitation in the crowd.

You have the right to an attorney. But that right does not extend to protect you from penalties from conspiring with the attorney to commit crimes.

All rights come with restrictions. All of them. Including the Second Amendment Rights.

You have the right to keep and bear arms. But that right doesn’t extend to a Court House. Or an airport. Or a sea port. Or a lot of other locations.

So I have no problem with some basic standards. I agree that the Jersey requirements are too strict. However I am chalking it up to experts deciding that this was the minimum tactical shooting skills to carry effectively instead of trying to keep anyone from carrying.

I would support basic proficiency testing. But not the advanced Taran Tactical Course as a minimum.

Crock of shit.

 

[miketx]

One example. Let’s say I was holding someone under Citizens Arrest at gunpoint. I had the bag stick out and aimed at the miscreant. In that case I’d be going to jail under arrest too. The charge would be Aggravated Assault.

Your first mistake is even trying to hold someone at gunpoint.

 

[SavannahMann]

Crock of shit.

Really. Carry your gun to the courthouse and tell the cops there that you have a Constitutional right to keep and bear arms anywhere. Now in ten years the Supreme Court may agree with you. But I doubt it. Because it would apply to their court house too and they know how crazy some people are.

In the mean time and probably some afterwards you would be in prison.

 

[rightwinger]

Yes the Founders disliked the idea of a standing army.

But the main clause of the 2nd is all about the right of the people as are all the amendments in the bill of rights.

There is no requirement implied or otherwise that any of the people be in the active militia before they can keep and carry firearms.

No, they intended that members of militia had access to arms

That is the purpose of the second amendment

 

[miketx]

Really. Carry your gun to the courthouse and tell the cops there that you have a Constitutional right to keep and bear arms anywhere. Now in ten years the Supreme Court may agree with you. But I doubt it. Because it would apply to their court house too and they know how crazy some people are.

In the mean time and probably some afterwards you would be in prison.

Come get them.