Will 2nd Amendment Stand Forever?

[HumblePie]

Then cite some cases. Arson tends to make the news. Especially when they catch the people responsible, and people die.

Why not stop being lazy?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_rampage_killers

 

[desura]

Why not stop being lazy?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_rampage_killers

Arson is hardly on there. It's all firearms. Especially in recent years.

 

[Doppel]

The real danger is a liberal-dominated supreme court that might overturn Heller.

Won't happen in any near future regardless of what tragedies occur.

Something gun grabbers like to promote is the idea that guns are losing popularity, an anachronism. Although less people are using them, there are a great many more of them with each year, and moreover the laws supporting their access are generally in fact better than they were a decade or two.

All it would take would be a single mass shooting stopped in the middle by the killing of the shooter by a civilian--not just "scared" like we've seen recently with the shooter in the mall--but actually taken out by that civilian.

 

[Fenixgoon]

Then cite some cases. Arson tends to make the news. Especially when they catch the people responsible, and people die.

ever heard of the oklahoma city bombing?

i dont think you need to pass a background check for buying fertilizer or surfing the internet...

 

[desura]

ever heard of the oklahoma city bombing?

i dont think you need to pass a background check for buying fertilizer or surfing the internet...

See, now we're going in circles...

As I've explained many times...a guy like Loughner or Cho simply isn't intelligent or capable enough to even build a bomb.

You can't stop all of the killers, as you guys point out time and time again, just like you can't stop ALL murders or ALL theft, but gun control could ensnare a SIGNIFICANT number of killers, just like how door locks and closed windows are a barrier to robbers..

 

[desura]

Won't happen in any near future regardless of what tragedies occur.

Something gun grabbers like to promote is the idea that guns are losing popularity, an anachronism. Although less people are using them, there are a great many more of them with each year, and moreover the laws supporting their access are generally in fact better than they were a decade or two.

All it would take would be a single mass shooting stopped in the middle by the killing of the shooter by a civilian--not just "scared" like we've seen recently with the shooter in the mall--but actually taken out by that civilian.

You said it: fewer people are using guns. They're really not necessary, unlike in old days when you might have wild animals raiding your hen house, and then they were simply a tool, not a fetish object.

It is creepy how fewer people are buying more guns, I will say that. like, operationally, it's a stupid hobby not that different from like being into home audio, but the gun lobby just takes things too far and as a result we have marginal people like Jared Loughner having access to guns.

 

[Doppel]

You said it: fewer people are using guns. They're really not necessary, unlike in old days when you might have wild animals raiding your hen house, and then they were simply a tool, not a fetish object.

It is creepy how fewer people are buying more guns, I will say that. like, operationally, it's a stupid hobby not that different from like being into home audio, but the gun lobby just takes things too far and as a result we have marginal people like Jared Loughner having access to guns.

protip: if you refer to people's guns as fetish objects and a stupid hobby you won't enamor any to your viewpoint.

They seem to be as much fetish objects for gun grabbers at times, who despite seeing a huge decrease in violent crime in the past few decades just can't let these things go.

 

[desura]

protip: if you refer to people's guns as fetish objects and a stupid hobby you won't enamor any to your viewpoint.

They seem to be as much fetish objects for gun grabbers at times, who despite seeing a huge decrease in violent crime in the past few decades just can't let these things go.

What? Do you see high end stereo aficionados getting so angry when people make fun of them? Why are you guys so sensitive about your inanimate objects?

My focus is mainly on these mass shootings. For violent crime, I believe the answer is more surveilance + smart police tactics like clean halls and S&F.

 

[Fenixgoon]

See, now we're going in circles...

As I've explained many times...a guy like Loughner or Cho simply isn't intelligent or capable enough to even build a bomb.

You can't stop all of the killers, as you guys point out time and time again, just like you can't stop ALL murders or ALL theft, but gun control could ensnare a SIGNIFICANT number of killers, just like how door locks and closed windows are a barrier to robbers..

isn't intelligent enough? all anyone has to do is some googling. can't get much easier than that.

now, it does require PLANNING, which someone who is mentally unstable may not be considering.

door locks and windows are barriers to CASUAL robbers. anyone who really wants to break into a house will. just like DRM prevents CASUAL pirates - those who want to pirate will and do so easily.

 

[HumblePie]

Arson is hardly on there. It's all firearms. Especially in recent years.

No it's not. And Firearms include things like bows, crossbows, grenade launchers, slingshots, flame throwers, and even throwing knives. The category is not just firearms.

In many cases the firearm was the "backup" weapon. Meaning it may or may not have been used. For example, with those that perpetrated vehicular manslaughter rampages, if a gun was in the car but not used it counts as being present.

But Timothy McVeigh used a truck full of fertilizer to blow up a building. The Bath School mass murder was done with bombs. Much of the BIG body counts are done with bombs or arson. Unless you are talking in other countries, in which case farm tools have been some major weapons of some mass murders.

But don't forget things like the mass murders that hijacked a few planes on 9/11/2001 to blow up some buildings with them.

 

[desura]

No it's not. And Firearms include things like bows, crossbows, grenade launchers, slingshots, flame throwers, and even throwing knives. The category is not just firearms.

In many cases the firearm was the "backup" weapon. Meaning it may or may not have been used. For example, with those that perpetrated vehicular manslaughter rampages, if a gun was in the car but not used it counts as being present.

But Timothy McVeigh used a truck full of fertilizer to blow up a building. The Bath School mass murder was done with bombs. Much of the BIG body counts are done with bombs or arson. Unless you are talking in other countries, in which case farm tools have been some major weapons of some mass murders.

But don't forget things like the mass murders that hijacked a few planes on 9/11/2001 to blow up some buildings with them.

And in 2 million years the sun will explode and all life will be extinguished.

So what? Just because bombs can do lots of damage doesn't mean that suddenly guns shouldn't be controlled at all. Your house could be hit by a meteoite so don't bother mowing your lawn. That's the worst kind of fatalism.

So really we're seeing a spate of bow/knife attacks unfairly classified as firearms. I mean, really. Really?

 

[desura]

isn't intelligent enough? all anyone has to do is some googling. can't get much easier than that.

now, it does require PLANNING, which someone who is mentally unstable may not be considering.

door locks and windows are barriers to CASUAL robbers. anyone who really wants to break into a house will. just like DRM prevents CASUAL pirates - those who want to pirate will and do so easily.

Some of the shooters were more "casual" than others. Loughner was probably the most casual IMO. Breivik was the most determined. Some of those closer to the Loughner end of things will be stopped by gun violence measures.

 

[HumblePie]

And in 2 million years the sun will explode and all life will be extinguished.

So what? Just because bombs can do lots of damage doesn't mean that suddenly guns shouldn't be controlled at all. Your house could be hit by a meteoite so don't bother mowing your lawn. That's the worst kind of fatalism.

So really we're seeing a spate of bow/knife attacks unfairly classified as firearms. I mean, really. Really?

Ugh, because making a law against have the sun blow up is just as effective as "gun control" for stopping violence or mass murders. It DOES NOT WORK. News flash, mass murders were around long before guns were. They will be around long after guns. You are never going to get rid of psycho's unless someone in the future finds some psycho genes and manages to turn them off in people somehow. Aka GATACA movie style or perhaps Serenity scifi style. That would be the only near full proof way to stop violent crimes and psychos.

 

[Agent11]

And in 2 million years the sun will explode and all life will be extinguished.

So what? Just because bombs can do lots of damage doesn't mean that suddenly guns shouldn't be controlled at all. Your house could be hit by a meteoite so don't bother mowing your lawn. That's the worst kind of fatalism.

So really we're seeing a spate of bow/knife attacks unfairly classified as firearms. I mean, really. Really?

nope. Most scientists think 2-5 Billion years until the sun goes Red Giant.

 

[desura]

Ugh, because making a law against have the sun blow up is just as effective as "gun control" for stopping violence or mass murders. It DOES NOT WORK. News flash, mass murders were around long before guns were. They will be around long after guns. You are never going to get rid of psycho's unless someone in the future finds some psycho genes and manages to turn them off in people somehow. Aka GATACA movie style or perhaps Serenity scifi style. That would be the only near full proof way to stop violent crimes and psychos.

No. The sun is a celestial object subject to physical laws.. Murderers are human, subject to human law.

Has anyone ever claimed that a mag size limit + improved background check would ELIMINATE murder? no. but they would make them less awful. Especially with proposals like CA where they would be detachable magazines altogether.

 

[moonbogg]

It might not be the solution. I personally wouldn't want something that went as far as Australia. I simply want a magazine size limit in place + universal background check.

But I'm also saying that the whole thing about gun laws only affecting law-abiding citizens and not affecting criminals is false. When they cracked down on guns, gun violence went down. The black market did not fill the gap.

edit: also, Australia has not suffered a serious mass shooting similar to the US, Canada, and other countries since passing this law. Mass shootings are what I care about in this debate the most.

That is understandable, and if it would truly stop there then people may be more willing to go that route. But all one has to do is lok to California as an example. They did the magazine limit as well as other measures. They said noone was going to take our guns, but look at what CA is trying to do now. They want to go the next step of course. They are trying with all their might, right now, to out right BAN and confiscate ALL semi auto rifles with detachable magazines! They want to tax the hell out of ammo and yes, take our damn guns. If they had the money to do it and the OK to go ahead, they would do it. So yes, they do want to take our guns.

 

[Genx87]

Heh I knew some idiot would spout off about tanks, nukes, and rocket launchers. You can always tell who the unhinged gun grabber is when they start an argument with that crap.

I think our 2nd amendment will be eroded like many other liberties in this country. The 1st and 4th amendment have been under attack nearly as much. And now the 5th and 6th are flying out the window as well.

 

[Zodiark1593]

Oh shit, I forgot that people aren't allowed to have knowledge about anything outside there own country.

And this coming from America, the biggest meddler in foreign affairs there is. You guys have an opinion on everything, even though you usually know shit about the subject.

This computer wasn't made here, am I allowed to use it?

How about you just fuck off? Haven't you got some brown people to bomb the shit out of?

This guy has a point. The sole purpose of a gun is that of destruction, regardless of whether used for malicious purposes, target shooting, or self defense. Even gun rights supporters would do well to keep this in mind when forming their arguments.

That said, I believe the second ammendment applies not only to defend against outsiders or the government, but also those who threaten order(criminals included). To this end, I believe that auto-loading (semi auto) firearms serve this purpose in an age where many criminals and outsiders have access to such weapons regardless of law.(The mentally ill is more likely affected by gun laws, but my point stands).

I dont believe full auto (pull and spray) firearms should go unregulated though. In a town or city, even self defense with such a weapon poses a strong risk of collateral damage and unintentional deaths. In the military, full auto modes are earely used outside of suppression, and isnt very practical overall when bystanders are involved. Semi auto rifles, at least, are unlikely to produce additional damage and death aside from intended targets. This is also what seperates explosives from semi auto firearms I might add.

Anyway, this is my opinion and views. Feel free to criticise how you see fit.

 

[piasabird]

Cops kill people with Guns all the time. One less dead dirtbag is no big deal. In reality the right to bear arms is the ultimate form of free speech. It was not too long ago that the cops in Chicago use to catch black people alone that caused problems and they would just kill them. Many of the Black Panthers died like this. The Government is not your friend.

 

[davmat787]

Arson is hardly on there. It's all firearms. Especially in recent years.

Geez, how hard can it be? Go to google and/or bing, click 'news' at the top, and search for 'arson death' or 'arson murder'. You should see plenty of info.

 

[lotus503]

Eventually it will become highly regulated but totally abolished I doubt it.

this

 

[FerrelGeek]

See, now we're going in circles...

As I've explained many times...a guy like Loughner or Cho simply isn't intelligent or capable enough to even build a bomb.

You can't stop all of the killers, as you guys point out time and time again, just like you can't stop ALL murders or ALL theft, but gun control could ensnare a SIGNIFICANT number of killers, just like how door locks and closed windows are a barrier to robbers..

Serious fail. The bombs that went off in Boston were relatively easy to build. I'd bet Loughner or Cho could've built them with instruction. And none of the currently gun control measures (as has been pointed out) would've stopped the recent mass shootings. You want to do something to radically stop gun deaths? Clean up the killing field that is Chicago and then apply it to other cities.

 

[wirednuts]

nope. Most scientists think 2-5 Billion years until the sun goes Red Giant.

yeah and they also believe there is basically no chance we last that long. shit, i bet sometime in the next million years we will have a catastrophic event happen... like a comet hitting us or a gamma ray burst from some star millions of lightyears away suddenly focuses a steady influx of gamma radiation on us, effectively microwaving our planet.

 

[exdeath]

There is no putting the worms back in the can. There are too many people with guns (and millions more guns and billions more ammo in the last few months alone).

Never forget... we outnumber them over 1000 to 1.

 

[Thebobo]

There is no putting the worms back in the can. There are too many people with guns (and millions more guns and billions more ammo in the last few months alone).

Never forget... we outnumber them over 1000 to 1.

I'll take one tank to your 1000 guns