Author Topic: Gun Rights  (Read 109263 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Ram23

  • 2717'-Burj Khalifa
  • **********
  • Posts: 4319
Re: Gun Rights
« Reply #1540 on: February 17, 2017, 10:57:39 AM »
Semi-automatic weapons with large loaded capacity favor defenders over attackers.[/color]

This is a completely irrelevant point.  Sure, if my home were under attack by roving hoards of bad hombres I totally agree that a large capacity magazine would be to my benefit, but that's not the world we live in.  We don't set up fortified defensive positions designed to sustain long term sieges.  We live in a civilized society, E Rocc.  One where large capacity magazines are used far more often for horrific mass shootings than they are for defensive reasons.

Who are people pissing off that bad to always have to worry about a home invasion? Are you a drug dealer? Do you owe people money for drugs?

Some random crackhead broke into a neighbors house a few weeks ago and stabbed him so he could steal a Playstation and some video games. The guy was just looking for some crap to pawn for drugs and didn't care about hurting someone to get it. You don't need to have enemies to be victimized.

Online Hts121

  • UO Supporting Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 16757
  • It's still just like your opinion, man
Re: Gun Rights
« Reply #1541 on: February 17, 2017, 11:01:26 AM »
You don't need to have enemies to be victimized.

Correct.... says every victim of Sandy Hook, Charleston, and the approximately 60 children under the age of 14 accidentally killed each year by someone with a gun.  That last number -- 60 -- is, by the way, about double the amount of TOTAL gun deaths per year in the UK.
Your true friends will help you up when someone knocks you down.  Your best friend will say "Stay down, I got this."

Offline GCrites80s

  • 2717'-Burj Khalifa
  • **********
  • Posts: 5961
  • Running Free
Re: Gun Rights
« Reply #1542 on: February 17, 2017, 11:20:12 AM »
The reason the military spends so much time training people on hand-to-hand combat and disarming is that in close quarters (such as in a house) those things are more effective than guns. Of course, that involves getting good at something and physical activity rather than just spending money.

Offline Ram23

  • 2717'-Burj Khalifa
  • **********
  • Posts: 4319
Re: Gun Rights
« Reply #1543 on: February 17, 2017, 12:10:04 PM »
You don't need to have enemies to be victimized.

Correct.... says every victim of Sandy Hook, Charleston, and the approximately 60 children under the age of 14 accidentally killed each year by someone with a gun.  That last number -- 60 -- is, by the way, about double the amount of TOTAL gun deaths per year in the UK.

Accidental shootings and mass shootings via assault rifle do not even come close to being the biggest concerns when it comes to violence in America. They're just the ones that you can try to use to appeal to emotion. Although I noticed you left far worse shootings like Orlando off of your list.. I wonder why?

Anti-gun nuts need to realize that they're never going to convince the bulk of gun owners, who are reasonable people who would never let their guns be used to nefarious reasons, to give up their rights because bad and dumb people misuse their guns. The problem with guns in America isn't the guns themselves, it's a problem of personal irresponsibility that permeates our country, far more so than many other developed nations.

Online Hts121

  • UO Supporting Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 16757
  • It's still just like your opinion, man
Re: Gun Rights
« Reply #1544 on: February 17, 2017, 12:22:58 PM »
Sorry.  You can add Orlando or whatever other mass shooting you need to see listed.  They are all tragic to me.  The victims are all innocent humans.

You on the other hand only post about events like these when the perps are not white.  I wonder why?  Hmmmmmmm.  But don't worry, I'm not made at you.  It's altwhite..... errrr, I mean altright..... errrrrr, I mean alright.

Accidental shootings and mass shootings via assault rifle do not even come close to being the biggest concerns when it comes to violence in America.

So then we do nothing about them?  Food stamps and welfare checks do not even come close to being the biggest concerns when it comes to our nation's debt/deficit.  I suppose we should ignore those too?  ISIS does not even come close to being the biggest concern when it comes to "violence in America".  We should ignore ISIS?  I have trouble following this supposed logic.  You are reaching. 
« Last Edit: February 17, 2017, 12:25:12 PM by Hts121 »
Your true friends will help you up when someone knocks you down.  Your best friend will say "Stay down, I got this."

Offline Hootenany

  • 2717'-Burj Khalifa
  • **********
  • Posts: 2446
Re: Gun Rights
« Reply #1545 on: February 17, 2017, 12:36:24 PM »
Anti-gun nuts need to realize that they're never going to convince the bulk of gun owners, who are reasonable people who would never let their guns be used to nefarious reasons, to give up their rights because bad and dumb people misuse their guns. The problem with guns in America isn't the guns themselves, it's a problem of personal irresponsibility that permeates our country, far more so than many other developed nations.

I can't speak for everyone, but I certainly wouldn't ask them to give up their right to own a gun.  But perhaps there are things we can do to make those weapons safer and less easy to use for mass killings.  The only sporting purpose of high capacity magazines is convenience.  That's it.  Perhaps in the name of public safety gun enthusiasts would be willing to shoulder the burden of a small inconvenience of reloading every 10 shots (I'm sure many of them would).  But any reasonable debate surrounding prevention of gun violence is essentially forbidden by the NRA who tells its followers that any restriction of gun ownership is a slippery slope toward confiscation and slavery.

Offline jmecklenborg

  • 2717'-Burj Khalifa
  • **********
  • Posts: 10097
Re: Gun Rights
« Reply #1546 on: February 17, 2017, 01:34:29 PM »
^The sex must've been good


They didn't have sex until they were married and she became pregnant the very first week.  You can't make this stuff up. 

Offline moonloop

  • 665'-Queen City Square
  • ******
  • Posts: 970
Re: Gun Rights
« Reply #1547 on: February 22, 2017, 01:31:15 PM »
good. progress.

Assault Weapons Not Protected by Second Amendment, Federal Appeals Court Rules
by THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
ANNAPOLIS, Md. — Maryland's ban on 45 kinds of assault weapons and its 10-round limit on gun magazines were upheld Tuesday.
"Put simply, we have no power to extend Second Amendment protections to weapons of war," Judge Robert King wrote for the court, adding that the Supreme Court's decision in District of Columbia v. Heller explicitly excluded such coverage.


http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/assault-weapons-not-protected-second-amendment-federal-appeals-court-rules-n724106



Offline E Rocc

  • 2717'-Burj Khalifa
  • **********
  • Posts: 7095
  • Defender Of The Sprawl
Re: Gun Rights
« Reply #1548 on: February 22, 2017, 04:03:48 PM »
good. progress.

Assault Weapons Not Protected by Second Amendment, Federal Appeals Court Rules
by THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
ANNAPOLIS, Md. — Maryland's ban on 45 kinds of assault weapons and its 10-round limit on gun magazines were upheld Tuesday.
"Put simply, we have no power to extend Second Amendment protections to weapons of war," Judge Robert King wrote for the court, adding that the Supreme Court's decision in District of Columbia v. Heller explicitly excluded such coverage.


http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/assault-weapons-not-protected-second-amendment-federal-appeals-court-rules-n724106

If anything, the "militia" clause means that basic military weapons are protected.  Even the government's attorneys in Miller argued that the shotgun in question could not be construed a military weapon.

Courts often make exclusions with respect to issues either not brought before them or not covered by precedent.   Heller did not establish the status of assault weapons because the plaintiffs did not argue about them.  It's much like Clarence Thomas's reminder that medical marijuana cases did not establish the Controlled Substances Act as Constitutional because it was not challenged.
When buying and selling are controlled by legislation, the first things to be bought and sold are legislators. P. J. O'Rourke

Online Hts121

  • UO Supporting Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 16757
  • It's still just like your opinion, man
Re: Gun Rights
« Reply #1549 on: February 22, 2017, 04:19:31 PM »
^Can't use the "militia" clause when its suits your purposes and ignore it when it doesn't.  If military weapons are protected, then I should be able to own whatever the military keeps in its stockpile, including MI tanks and nuclear submarines. 
Your true friends will help you up when someone knocks you down.  Your best friend will say "Stay down, I got this."

Offline E Rocc

  • 2717'-Burj Khalifa
  • **********
  • Posts: 7095
  • Defender Of The Sprawl
Re: Gun Rights
« Reply #1550 on: February 22, 2017, 08:06:26 PM »
^Can't use the "militia" clause when its suits your purposes and ignore it when it doesn't.  If military weapons are protected, then I should be able to own whatever the military keeps in its stockpile, including MI tanks and nuclear submarines. 

It's a justification, not a modifier.   But much depends on the meaning of the word "arms".

An AR-15 isn't quite a military rifle anyway, it's not full auto
When buying and selling are controlled by legislation, the first things to be bought and sold are legislators. P. J. O'Rourke

Online Hts121

  • UO Supporting Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 16757
  • It's still just like your opinion, man
Re: Gun Rights
« Reply #1551 on: February 23, 2017, 07:36:56 AM »
^neither is a missile launcher
Your true friends will help you up when someone knocks you down.  Your best friend will say "Stay down, I got this."

Offline E Rocc

  • 2717'-Burj Khalifa
  • **********
  • Posts: 7095
  • Defender Of The Sprawl
Re: Gun Rights
« Reply #1552 on: February 23, 2017, 07:55:18 AM »
The reason the military spends so much time training people on hand-to-hand combat and disarming is that in close quarters (such as in a house) those things are more effective than guns. Of course, that involves getting good at something and physical activity rather than just spending money.

It also involves being at least reasonably young and, in the vast majority of cases, male. 

Guns allow a 5 foot tall older woman to successfully resist a physically much stronger attacker.   Semiautomatic weapons let her resist several.


When buying and selling are controlled by legislation, the first things to be bought and sold are legislators. P. J. O'Rourke

Offline Ram23

  • 2717'-Burj Khalifa
  • **********
  • Posts: 4319
Re: Gun Rights
« Reply #1553 on: February 23, 2017, 09:33:00 AM »
^Can't use the "militia" clause when its suits your purposes and ignore it when it doesn't.

Perhaps you should tell that to our court system, who is doing exactly that, not E Rocc, who is simply using legal precedent. The militia clause does actually help preserve gun rights, IMO.

Miller states: "The Court cannot take judicial notice that a shotgun having a barrel less than 18 inches long has today any reasonable relation to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia, and therefore cannot say that the Second Amendment guarantees to the citizen the right to keep and bear such a weapon."

So if a weapon has a use in the militia the 2nd Amendment guarantees the citizens can bear such a weapon. Heller goes on to stipulate that ownership of said weapons is an individual right, so you do not need to actually be a part of any actual militia to have this right.

That said, this ruling is based on politics, not law or precedent. This court should be ashamed. They managed to ignore both Heller and Miller in order to make their ruling. If nothing else that's pretty impressive, most liberals just try to ignore one or the other.

Offline GCrites80s

  • 2717'-Burj Khalifa
  • **********
  • Posts: 5961
  • Running Free
Re: Gun Rights
« Reply #1554 on: February 23, 2017, 10:08:31 AM »
The reason the military spends so much time training people on hand-to-hand combat and disarming is that in close quarters (such as in a house) those things are more effective than guns. Of course, that involves getting good at something and physical activity rather than just spending money.

It also involves being at least reasonably young and, in the vast majority of cases, male. 

Guns allow a 5 foot tall older woman to successfully resist a physically much stronger attacker.   Semiautomatic weapons let her resist several.





How often has this "Stop or My Mom Will Shoot" scenario played out?

Online Hts121

  • UO Supporting Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 16757
  • It's still just like your opinion, man
Re: Gun Rights
« Reply #1555 on: February 23, 2017, 10:14:34 AM »
^probably a fraction of the times "my toddler did shoot" played out.
Your true friends will help you up when someone knocks you down.  Your best friend will say "Stay down, I got this."

Offline E Rocc

  • 2717'-Burj Khalifa
  • **********
  • Posts: 7095
  • Defender Of The Sprawl
Re: Gun Rights
« Reply #1556 on: February 23, 2017, 11:45:56 AM »
^Can't use the "militia" clause when its suits your purposes and ignore it when it doesn't.

Perhaps you should tell that to our court system, who is doing exactly that, not E Rocc, who is simply using legal precedent. The militia clause does actually help preserve gun rights, IMO.

Miller states: "The Court cannot take judicial notice that a shotgun having a barrel less than 18 inches long has today any reasonable relation to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia, and therefore cannot say that the Second Amendment guarantees to the citizen the right to keep and bear such a weapon."

So if a weapon has a use in the militia the 2nd Amendment guarantees the citizens can bear such a weapon. Heller goes on to stipulate that ownership of said weapons is an individual right, so you do not need to actually be a part of any actual militia to have this right.

That said, this ruling is based on politics, not law or precedent. This court should be ashamed. They managed to ignore both Heller and Miller in order to make their ruling. If nothing else that's pretty impressive, most liberals just try to ignore one or the other.

The really crazy thing about Miller is it wasn’t actually argued at the Supreme Court level.   Only the government was represented.   The case was dismissed by the District Court and Jack Miller was released.  He vanished and his attorney did not have the resources to travel to DC.  Therefore, only the government’s arguments could be considered.

Needless to say, this would not happen today.

When buying and selling are controlled by legislation, the first things to be bought and sold are legislators. P. J. O'Rourke

Offline E Rocc

  • 2717'-Burj Khalifa
  • **********
  • Posts: 7095
  • Defender Of The Sprawl
Re: Gun Rights
« Reply #1557 on: February 23, 2017, 12:21:14 PM »
The reason the military spends so much time training people on hand-to-hand combat and disarming is that in close quarters (such as in a house) those things are more effective than guns. Of course, that involves getting good at something and physical activity rather than just spending money.

It also involves being at least reasonably young and, in the vast majority of cases, male. 

Guns allow a 5 foot tall older woman to successfully resist a physically much stronger attacker.   Semiautomatic weapons let her resist several.





How often has this "Stop or My Mom Will Shoot" scenario played out?

http://reason.com/blog/2015/03/09/how-to-count-the-defensive-use-of-guns

At least 100,000 a year, possibly as many as 2.5 million.  It depends on the definition.  The vast majority do not involve firing the gun. 

There was a time in Bedford when my girlfriend saw some strange guys in the parking lot, my neighbor and I both walked outside weapons in hand.  They were testing the locks on parked cars, saw us, and bolted.  Does that count?
When buying and selling are controlled by legislation, the first things to be bought and sold are legislators. P. J. O'Rourke

Offline GCrites80s

  • 2717'-Burj Khalifa
  • **********
  • Posts: 5961
  • Running Free
Re: Gun Rights
« Reply #1558 on: February 23, 2017, 12:32:23 PM »
I threw rotten eggs out of my 3rd floor window one time at a guy who was doing that. He bolted.

Offline bfwissel

  • 629'-Rhodes State Tower
  • *****
  • Posts: 630
    • My Cincinnati Life
Re: Gun Rights
« Reply #1559 on: February 23, 2017, 12:40:10 PM »
I threw rotten eggs out of my 3rd floor window one time at a guy who was doing that. He bolted.

You mean you didn't use a 9mm Uzi?  Gonna have to take away your man card ;-) :P
"Someone's sitting in the shade today because someone planted a tree a long time ago." - Warren Buffett

Offline E Rocc

  • 2717'-Burj Khalifa
  • **********
  • Posts: 7095
  • Defender Of The Sprawl
Re: Gun Rights
« Reply #1560 on: February 23, 2017, 05:23:54 PM »
I threw rotten eggs out of my 3rd floor window one time at a guy who was doing that. He bolted.

Well I only had one floor and a sanitary refrigerator.  :)
When buying and selling are controlled by legislation, the first things to be bought and sold are legislators. P. J. O'Rourke

Offline KJP

  • Premium Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 35457
  • Rebuilding the cities that built America.
    • All Aboard Ohio
Re: Gun Rights
« Reply #1561 on: Yesterday at 07:32:43 AM »
"Privilege is when you think that something's not a problem because it's not a problem for you personally."
--David Gaider

Offline E Rocc

  • 2717'-Burj Khalifa
  • **********
  • Posts: 7095
  • Defender Of The Sprawl
Re: Gun Rights
« Reply #1562 on: Yesterday at 09:38:20 AM »
Yay

Assault Weapons Not Protected by Second Amendment, Federal Appeals Court Rules
http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/assault-weapons-not-protected-second-amendment-federal-appeals-court-rules-n724106?cid=sm_npd_ms_fb_lw

Same case as referenced above.  Same replies.

By the way, there's a way to deal with laws like this, that could benefit Ohio:

http://money.cnn.com/2015/12/17/news/companies/beretta-guns-factory-tennessee-maryland/

 
When buying and selling are controlled by legislation, the first things to be bought and sold are legislators. P. J. O'Rourke

Remove Ads