Give me legitimate debate on the second amendment and if gun control in any form is constitutional.
-
Happy Guns35% Voted for by gobuggy99, looking4realtruth, cassalie, NeferMaatNetjer, mygeneration.
I just wanted to say Kudos to everyone, especially webdemon666! This topic has been thorougly canvassed, and almost everything I would say has been said already!!! The thing I did want to say is this. Not only is gun control illogical for the reasons already stated, IT IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL. The Second Amendment states, "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." Now, some people say that the National or Coast Guard has taken place of a militia. BY DEFINITION, however, this sort of organization is not a militia. A militia is defined as an organization of private citizens, bearing privately owned arms and under internal leadership and regulations. Tenche Cox, a promintent Founding Father, stated, "Who are the militia? Are they not ourselves? Congress shall have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birthright of an American...[T]he unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state governments, but, where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the people." Incidentally, this view was shared by practically all the Founding Fathers. America had just fought a war over power. The Founding Fathers included the Second Amendment as the primary means of keeping the power in the hands of the people!! Having just been freed from Britain, they feared another tyrannical government system. Thus, they looked upon it as the responsible citizen's duty to rebel if the government became tyranical. How would Americans do this if the government had all the guns???? Therefore, the only possible contextual definition of "milita" is not an organization such as the Coast Guard, or the National Guard. The militia consists of the free, individual, private people of America, and as such, it is every American's right to bear arms. GO NRA!!!!!!!!
-
I love guns BUT14% Voted for by webdemon666, NeferMaatNetjer.
You hear the debate and the arguing and the cussing and the brawls that ensue when talking about gun control. Here is my opinion. The second amendment of the constitution guarantees the right to bare arms for a strong militia. what this means is that every American has the right to defend themselves, their property and America if invaded. That is what a militia does. There are forces in this country trying to take that right away from us. It is important for you to realize that other countries have gone this rout, and and felt the burn as the streets fell into chaos. People have this Idea that if you take the guns, crime will magically disappear but in Australia gun related crime went up 300 percent. Taking guns from the citizens left only the criminals with guns. The same rang true in Canada. Conversely in a Floridian town the mayor of this town declared open season on violent offenders. If a crime was being committed it was perfectly legal to take them out. Crime went down to nearly nothing. The criminals were forced to wait on the road leading to the airport, because they knew that was the only place that people would not have guns. We are not a popular country, and frankly we never really have been. No other country since the war of 1812 has tried to invade our borders (unless you count illegal aliens from Mexico) my point is who would want to go up against 300 million crazy American rednecks with guns?
-
moreVoted for by gobuggy99.
Here is an EXCELLENT statistic site.
http://www.beast-enterprises.com/ccw.html
Enjoy.
-
safety over rights for me...for onceVoted for by ohsweetie2788.
controling guns does make society safer so if you look at it from that point of view then it is constituational to control the seeling of guns or the right to bare arms. but if you think about from the other perspective of it crimping the rights of the people who want to own guns or want to bare arms then it is not constitutional. to decide whether or not it is constitutional is really hard and it takes someone who knows the kaw in and out to argue it but in my opinion it is constitutional because it is helping to protect our nations people. i look at safety rather than rights in this case.
~Ash~
-
Pro, cause I support a culture of lifeVoted for by heresyistheway.
Alright. Everyone go watch "Bowling for Columbine" now now calm down. I think Moores a bit of a manipulative ass at times too. But in all truth, his movie opened my eyes to the OTHER side of what he was trying to get to. The fact that Candada has as many guns as us and yet waaaaaay less gun murders is shocking. And here's why I think that is:
ask a Canadian why they have a gun "well we live in pretty much country region and hunt for our food" because, while yes yes there are lots of wonderful technological Canadian cities (and I adore Canada so don't get me wrong, it's better than America in many ways) it's still got a lot more "wild" land than America.
Ask an American why they have a gun? "TO PROTECT MYSELF" from fucking what? The unstable "baby nation" days in which our Bill of Rights and such were written were times when a family might need to turn their home into a fort and become miny-soldiers. Those times, my friends, are gone. We have a strong (if highly corrupt) federal government, police, army, national guard, etc. There is most probably NEVER going to be a time when you will have to defend your life with that dumbass dangerous gun you hid under you pillow. But there may very well be a time when your child finds it and shoots themself.
Until Americans can get over their incredible paranoia, we NEED to stop giving the "average American Joe" a gun, because he's clearly too unstable to have it.
-
My Favorite Topic!Voted for by Midget Of Fury.
I was born in Massachusetts and practically raised in Georgia so I've been in both perspectives of the Gun Control battle. Here in The South, guns are omnipresent. You walk into a good ol' boy's house and you expect there to be firearms. Massachusetts on the other hand has very strict gun laws. If somebody were to walk into your home and try to harm your property, you give them fair warning and then shot them (not killing them, mind you) you'd still be punished. There's three main types of gun owners: those who carry around a firearm solely for the protection of them and their family, those who carry them for recreational purposes (i.e. hunters, collectors, etc.), and those who use them for harm on others. The first two know how to use a gun, know it's limitations, it's abilities and where and when to use one. The last are they only ones you have to worry about. But how are you to protect yourself when one of the latter category pulls a gun on you and you dont own one? "Hey man, I actually dont have a gun. Gimme 20 minutes, I'll go get one and meet you back here?" just wont cut it. Yes, we should have laws for gun use, but laws that give structure to use not forbidding it.
-
Survival and weapons use, ownershipVoted for by cafegroundzero.
I have two guns, a shotgun and a .357 European Arms revolver. I grew up feeling I would like to be a pacifist, and abhorring violence. However, this option was really denied me, and try as I did, the violence applied against me might have seriously injured or killed me. And the violence I've seen inflicted on others is such that I do not put my faith in the kind of peaceful resistance Ghandi taught.
My family are both Holocaust survivors and survivors of the Mexican Revolution. I suspect I've ancestors who fled the Inquisition, who hid as Catholics when they were at heart Jewish, and eventually forgot their Yiddishkeit.
The Balkan wars affected me more than one might suppose, though I did not live there. However, I have a tremendous capacity for empathy, and I had at an early age learned Serb and Croat, so I followed the events which unfolded after the death of Tito, after the secession of Slovenia in 1991. I followed them as closely as one is able to from across Europe,the Atlantic, even as far as western Alaska. No, I never claimed to be normal.
These days I watch and bide the time as the post-911 age evolves. I see our liberties and rights erode even as terrorists multiply, as anti-American and anti-global sentiment grows, as corporations and the military-industrial complexes expand their reach and influence into every valley, every hill, every riverine system and ocean current.
No, I will not surrender my weapons. But neither will I put my faith in them.
No one hear has, as far as I've read, discussed adequately the use and proficiency in weapons, the moderation in the relationship between man and weapon. And far too much attention is paid to firearms, as opposed to any kind of weapon and its use in violence or self-defense.
-
After the Bush Administration I am PRO GunsVoted for by david13.
I always thought that guns were not a good idea. I oppose killing even in sport (though I'll compromise if you eat what you shoot and there is over-population). What changed my mind is the Bush administration's attack on personal freedom. This country was on the cusp of our total freedom being taken away. The Statue of Liberty remained vacant during Bush's time in office. That alone says it all: Bush took away the Light, the beacon that was the United States. He put us in DARKNESS. And he was mid-election away of MARTIAL LAW. This is why I am now PRO guns. At least if there were martial law declared, at least one gun owner with a good clear shot could take down the tyrant and stealer of human rights. No guns and there would be no chance. At least with guns out here, there is always a chance which leaves tryants with that fear clearly in their conscience, that they could be blown away just like he blows away people. Fear, if it is used by government MUST be used BACK by its citizens.
Adding your reply:
Registration is required because of issues with spam. It is fast and free! This author would LOVE to get a comment from you, please join!
Please register or login to comment! It's totally free