Societal Decay - Henson Ong

[RedskinRat]

Originally Posted by Giantone

no way the founders of this country would sit back and justify the murder of 20 children it is the people (NRA) that believe that crap that scare me,they are not responsible gun owners.

Please show any evidence you have for the NRA justifying the murders of 20 kids, or is this yet another of your poorly constructed sentences that adds nothing to the discussion?

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by Giantone

I understand how you feel but it is a "right" gauranteed by the Constitution but as I have said before it can't go unchecked.You have the right as all Americans to "Free Speach" yet the Surprem Court says it is not your right to scream "fire" in a crowded movie thearter.As always there must be checks and balances on everything,no way the founders of this country would sit back and justify the murder of 20 children it is the people (NRA) that believe that crap that scare me,they are not responsible gun owners.

Yelling "fire" is against the law just like killing people, carring a gun into a school, and stealing the gun so we do have a check and balance. If a person yelled "fire" would you then want to limit everyones freedom of speach? Also I'd say the member of the NRA are the responsable gun owners.

[firstdown]

What a dumb ass. He would tell his wife to take their double barrell shot gun out side and fire both rounds into the air to scare off an intruder. OK, if that does not work she is now out of ammo. LMAO

Gun Joe Biden Says No Need To Own Assault...

[Daseal]

Originally Posted by Giantone

I understand how you feel but it is a "right" gauranteed by the Constitution but as I have said before it can't go unchecked.You have the right as all Americans to "Free Speach" yet the Surprem Court says it is not your right to scream "fire" in a crowded movie thearter.As always there must be checks and balances on everything,no way the founders of this country would sit back and justify the murder of 20 children it is the people (NRA) that believe that crap that scare me,they are not responsible gun owners.

I think I did a poor job of illuminating my initial thought. However, let's first clear up free speech. Firstdown mentioned you can't scream fire in a crowded theatre. We are not actually entitled to free speech in this country, what we are entitled to, is that the government can't make laws limiting free speech. Private establishments are free to regulate speech however they deem fit, but the government can not make laws concerning speech on government land (arguable with things such as cussing bans, etc).

What I was trying to argue -- is I think the word right should not be used. I consider a right something that everyone is entitled to, regardless of their situation. There are very few 'rights' in this world, and they can greatly vary based on location. If owning a gun were a true right, then everyone would be entitled to have a gun. Felons, mentally handicapped, prisoners, etc. Everyone would be allowed to own a gun. I don't think anyone is in favor of everyone being guaranteed access to a weapon.

The 2nd amendendment reads:
"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."

Like everything else in this document, it was written to be ambigious. I can see many interpretations being justified different ways. All I was trying to say, is that calling it a right is a dangerous path. To me, gun ownership is anagalous to driving a car. You should have to meet some minimum standard, there are multiple classes of ownership (Handgun, Rifle, etc etc), and if you don't treat it responsibly - it can be taken away. I consider those types of rules a priviledge, not a right.

Regardless of the words used (priviledge vs right) I think most of us are in agreement that certain people should not be given access to firearms.

[RedskinRat]

Originally Posted by Daseal

If owning a gun were a true right, then everyone would be entitled to have a gun. Felons, mentally handicapped, prisoners, etc. Everyone would be allowed to own a gun. I don't think anyone is in favor of everyone being guaranteed access to a weapon.

I would agree. No one here is arguing that we arm everyone. You could also include NOT having to keep and bear arms.

Originally Posted by Daseal

To me, gun ownership is anagalous to driving a car. You should have to meet some minimum standard, there are multiple classes of ownership (Handgun, Rifle, etc etc), and if you don't treat it responsibly - it can be taken away. I consider those types of rules a priviledge, not a right.

That's how it currently works. I had to pass a basic firearms exam, then if you opt for a CCW there are even more rigorous tests etc. Certain people lose their right to have a firearm, like felons.

Originally Posted by Daseal

Regardless of the words used (priviledge vs right) I think most of us are in agreement that certain people should not be given access to firearms.

And they're not. It's a right that your forfeit if you demonstrate you can't be responsible.

[Giantone]

Originally Posted by RedskinRat

Please show any evidence you have for the NRA justifying the murders of 20 kids, or is this yet another of your poorly constructed sentences that adds nothing to the discussion?

The NRA response to the killings in Conn and the Ad using the presidents children are proof enough for me.

[Giantone]

Originally Posted by RedskinRat

I would agree. No one here is arguing that we arm everyone. You could also include NOT having to keep and bear arms.



That's how it currently works. I had to pass a basic firearms exam, then if you opt for a CCW there are even more rigorous tests etc. Certain people lose their right to have a firearm, like felons.



And they're not. It's a right that your forfeit if you demonstrate you can't be responsible.

So what about Gun shows and lets say I sell my guns to joe Smith next door nothing illeagel about is there,no,do I have to perform rigorous tests etc on them,no.

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by Giantone

So what about Gun shows and lets say I sell my guns to joe Smith next door nothing illeagel about is there,no,do I have to perform rigorous tests etc on them,no.

All Lic gun dealers have to do back ground checks at gun shows.

[RedskinRat]

Correct:

NRA Stand and Fight: We Are America - YouTube

[RedskinRat]

Prime example of why Gun Free Zones are only good for criminals:

Campus Rape Victim Amanda Collins Responds to...

Tough to hear her recounting the crime.

[Alvin Walton]

Originally Posted by firstdown

All Lic gun dealers have to do back ground checks at gun shows.

Thats not true for rifles.
Not in Michigan anyways.
I've bought plenty of bolt action rifles at gun shows and all I needed was a drivers license and they just record info from it or take a digital picture of it and file it.
And you cant buy a pistol without first getting a permit from the cop shop so there is no need for a background check after that, the cops have already done it.

[Alvin Walton]

Originally Posted by Giantone

So what about Gun shows and lets say I sell my guns to joe Smith next door nothing illeagel about is there,no,do I have to perform rigorous tests etc on them,no.

It all depends on what kind of gun and what the state laws are.
Its not that simple.

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by Alvin Walton

Thats not true for rifles.
Not in Michigan anyways.
I've bought plenty of bolt action rifles at gun shows and all I needed was a drivers license and they just record info from it or take a digital picture of it and file it.
And you cant buy a pistol without first getting a permit from the cop shop so there is no need for a background check after that, the cops have already done it.

Here in Va there is no check if your buying the gun at a gun show from an individual. If its a lic. gun dealer then a back ground check is done for any type of gun.

[Giantone]

Living here in Maryland I will admit this surprised me.

Washington Post poll finds support for stricter gun control laws in Maryland - The Washington Post

Maryland residents overwhelmingly support Gov. Martin O’Malley’s plan to force gun buyers to submit to fingerprinting, safety training and more background checks, according to a new Washington Post poll.
Across the state, fully 85 percent back the governor’s licensing plan and 73 percent do so “strongly.” They also support banning high-capacity ammunition clips and assault weapons — two other portions of O’Malley’s (D) bill, which in the wake of the December school shooting in Newtown, Conn., would give Maryland among the nation’s strictest gun-control laws.

[Alvin Walton]

Jeez I am so tired of hearing about high cap magazines.
There are so many ways around that its effing ridiculous.