BigSqwert Posted December 17, 2012 Author Share Posted December 17, 2012 So back to the question in the title of this thread? Is it time to revisit the 2nd amendment? For those who've been saying no, is there any scenario at all where you would consider doing so? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve9347 Posted December 17, 2012 Share Posted December 17, 2012 QUOTE (Y2HH @ Dec 17, 2012 -> 02:56 PM) That's a pretty victim way of looking at things, but whatever. If some f***bags break into my house, I'm going to go down swinging, stabbing, bashing or shooting...to my last dying breath, I'd refuse to accept the idea that "hoping and praying" these people that obviously have no use for the law will "allow me or my family to live". Until they do it to the next family, because people keep letting them get away with it...eventually someone innocents dying. The odds of you dying in that situation are already raised substantially, so at that point, f*** it...and f*** them. A post like this gets me pumped up, even if it is unrealistic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2HH Posted December 17, 2012 Share Posted December 17, 2012 QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Dec 17, 2012 -> 02:56 PM) So back to the question in the title of this thread? Is it time to revisit the 2nd amendment? For those who've been saying no, is there any scenario at all where you would consider doing so? I think it's worth revisiting serious FEDERAL restrictions, laws and enforced penalties on gun use/ownership. The idea of them ever doing something to an amendment in the bill of rights seems like a pipe dream at best... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jenksismyhero Posted December 17, 2012 Share Posted December 17, 2012 (edited) QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Dec 17, 2012 -> 02:56 PM) So back to the question in the title of this thread? Is it time to revisit the 2nd amendment? For those who've been saying no, is there any scenario at all where you would consider doing so? When crime is eradicated and there is no more game to kill. Maybe then. You could talk me into banning certain types of weapons but with special permits/privileges. You could talk me into more education, certification, training, background checks, waiting periods etc. But at the end of the day, no, I will never stop supporting a right to bear arms. Edited December 17, 2012 by Jenksismybitch Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EvilMonkey Posted December 17, 2012 Share Posted December 17, 2012 Restriction can be made, but when they place an undo burden on using that right, like poll taxes and what some claim ID's are to voting, they are unconstitutional. Placing a tax on ammo high enough to make it unobtainable to all but the rich would be an undo burden. At some point, restricting the type can also be an undo burden. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soxbadger Posted December 17, 2012 Share Posted December 17, 2012 QUOTE (Alpha Dog @ Dec 17, 2012 -> 03:02 PM) Restriction can be made, but when they place an undo burden on using that right, like poll taxes and what some claim ID's are to voting, they are unconstitutional. Placing a tax on ammo high enough to make it unobtainable to all but the rich would be an undo burden. At some point, restricting the type can also be an undo burden. I dont value guns nearly as much as I value speech, voting, etc. I think gun ownership should be unduly burdensome. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangeSox Posted December 17, 2012 Share Posted December 17, 2012 that's exactly why the thread started off asking if its time to revisit the 2nd. If it's modified via amendment (or changed via overruling Heller), then you don't need to talk about what is unconstitutional or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted December 17, 2012 Share Posted December 17, 2012 QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Dec 17, 2012 -> 02:50 PM) People consider accidents with guns all the time. That's why you practice gun safety. You act as though people with guns are irresponsible or something, like anyone with a gun eventually shoots someone by accident. No, but the problem is an accident usually isn't a real small problem. I bet average a law abiding gun owning citizen shoots someone or themselves by accident more often than they shoot someone invading their home. I would also bet far more people have been killed by people shooting guns that were purchased to "protect" homes and family, who were absolutely no threat to someone's home or family. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soxbadger Posted December 17, 2012 Share Posted December 17, 2012 Well the simplest place to start is that guns are a privilege not a right and therefore they should be able to be restricted like any other privilege (driving a car.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DukeNukeEm Posted December 17, 2012 Share Posted December 17, 2012 (edited) So back to the question in the title of this thread? Is it time to revisit the 2nd amendment? For those who've been saying no, is there any scenario at all where you would consider doing so? Violent crime is practically non-existant [ ] I can trust the government to hold a complete monopoly on the use of force [ ] ... I can trust to government to do anything for that matter [ ] There you go, that's what would have to happen to even get me to even think this is worth debating. Edited December 17, 2012 by DukeNukeEm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted December 17, 2012 Share Posted December 17, 2012 QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Dec 17, 2012 -> 03:50 PM) People consider accidents with guns all the time. That's why you practice gun safety. You act as though people with guns are irresponsible or something, like anyone with a gun eventually shoots someone by accident. And yet you're the same one who explained earlier today why you wouldn't keep your guns locked. No, not everyone shoots someone by accident, not everyone's kid commits suicide. But not every gun owner has a group of black men break down their door and stand by while that gun owner gets off enough shots to become the hero...but we get that described in vivid detail here. We don't get it described in vivid detail how someone's 7 year old found their unlocked gun and blew their friend's face off. We don't get it described in vivid detail how someone's teenager has a runin with a bully and then winds up deciding that's not going to happen again, hurting themselves or the other kid. We get the hero fantasy described. Everyone feels good about that emotion. It's power, and we like power. But when something goes wrong...why that's just an accident. It can't be blamed on the product and we shouldn't do anything to make it safer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangeSox Posted December 17, 2012 Share Posted December 17, 2012 We can't get rid of [tools of violent crime] until violent crime is stopped. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigSqwert Posted December 17, 2012 Author Share Posted December 17, 2012 QUOTE (DukeNukeEm @ Dec 17, 2012 -> 01:08 PM) Violent crime is practically non-existant [ ] I can trust the government to hold a complete monopoly on the use of force [ ] ... I can trust to government to do anything for that matter [ ] There you go, that's what would have to happen to even get me to even think this is worth debating. Ah. The one man army against the greatest military might in the world. That'd be fun to watch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DukeNukeEm Posted December 17, 2012 Share Posted December 17, 2012 Well the simplest place to start is that guns are a privilege not a right and therefore they should be able to be restricted like any other privilege (driving a car.) *driving a car on public roads You can drive a car without a license on your property to your little hearts content. Its when you take it out in public, where you are given the privilege to use state-owned roads, that your right to drive a car is limited. Same should go for guns. If you want them in your house go for it dude, but if you want to take around town in public places then you have to play by a set of rules. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted December 17, 2012 Share Posted December 17, 2012 QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Dec 17, 2012 -> 04:08 PM) I bet average a law abiding gun owning citizen shoots someone or themselves by accident more often than they shoot someone invading their home. I would also bet far more people have been killed by people shooting guns that were purchased to "protect" homes and family, who were absolutely no threat to someone's home or family. Accidental firearm deaths are about ~600 a year. The FBI keeps records of successful uses of guns to defend a home, and that is about 200 a year. The FBI does not keep records of what Steve said...unsuccessful uses of guns to defend a home. Gun accidents kill a similar number of kids under 11 per year as home intruders. And again...that's not counting suicides, which are by quite a bit the most common use of guns in the united states (nearly 20k per year) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DukeNukeEm Posted December 17, 2012 Share Posted December 17, 2012 Ah. The one man army against the greatest military might in the world. That'd be fun to watch. Greatest military might in the world has been stuck fighting goat herders in the mountains of Afghanistan for the past 10 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangeSox Posted December 17, 2012 Share Posted December 17, 2012 QUOTE (Alpha Dog @ Dec 17, 2012 -> 02:32 PM) I was going to edit that after that was when I got my handguns and rifle, realizing that my shotgun wasn't going to do much until they got closer. I have had that gun since I was 10. I still got shot at, and a few more steps I was opening fire. Yet you never had to use your gun, and you relied on the police. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigSqwert Posted December 17, 2012 Author Share Posted December 17, 2012 QUOTE (DukeNukeEm @ Dec 17, 2012 -> 01:12 PM) Greatest military might in the world has been stuck fighting goat herders in the mountains of Afghanistan for the past 10 years. Ah I see. Didn't realize you owned rocket launchers as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quin Posted December 17, 2012 Share Posted December 17, 2012 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 17, 2012 -> 03:12 PM) Accidental firearm deaths are about ~600 a year. The FBI keeps records of successful uses of guns to defend a home, and that is about 200 a year. The FBI does not keep records of what Steve said...unsuccessful uses of guns to defend a home. I think this right here is an important statistic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EvilMonkey Posted December 17, 2012 Share Posted December 17, 2012 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 17, 2012 -> 03:10 PM) We don't get it described in vivid detail how someone's 7 year old found their unlocked gun and blew their friend's face off. We don't get it described in vivid detail how someone's teenager has a runin with a bully and then winds up deciding that's not going to happen again, hurting themselves or the other kid. And just how often does that happen? In 2009, according to the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, 66.9% of all homicides in the United States were perpetrated using a firearm. There were 52,447 deliberate and 23,237 accidental non-fatal gunshot injuries in the United States during 2000. The majority of gun-related deaths in the United States are suicides, with 17,352 (55.6%) of the total 31,224 firearm-related deaths in 2007 due to suicide, while 12,632 (40.5%) were homicide deaths. That would mean out of the 31k total gun death, 1240 were somethign other than suicide or homicide. not a big number, to be sure, although I will grant you is is a huge number to those effected. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr_genius Posted December 17, 2012 Share Posted December 17, 2012 QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Dec 17, 2012 -> 02:56 PM) So back to the question in the title of this thread? Is it time to revisit the 2nd amendment? I don't have a problem with certain types of weapons being illegal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soxbadger Posted December 17, 2012 Share Posted December 17, 2012 QUOTE (DukeNukeEm @ Dec 17, 2012 -> 03:12 PM) *driving a car on public roads You can drive a car without a license on your property to your little hearts content. Its when you take it out in public, where you are given the privilege to use state-owned roads, that your right to drive a car is limited. Same should go for guns. If you want them in your house go for it dude, but if you want to take around town in public places then you have to play by a set of rules. Well then we basically agree as my arguments are generally against c&c (which is in the public). Having a gun in your own home is your risk, although I do think there should be some sort of common sense laws about keeping the guns away from people who are not residents of the home. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted December 17, 2012 Share Posted December 17, 2012 QUOTE (Quinarvy @ Dec 17, 2012 -> 04:14 PM) I think this right here is an important statistic. Here's that FBI data table, since someone noticed when I cited that one this time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted December 17, 2012 Share Posted December 17, 2012 QUOTE (Alpha Dog @ Dec 17, 2012 -> 04:16 PM) And just how often does that happen? The number of kids 11 and under who die in gun accidents per year is approximately equal to the number of justifiable homicides per year. One of those stories gets told as justification for having an unlocked gun around. The other does not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jenksismyhero Posted December 17, 2012 Share Posted December 17, 2012 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 17, 2012 -> 03:10 PM) And yet you're the same one who explained earlier today why you wouldn't keep your guns locked. No, not everyone shoots someone by accident, not everyone's kid commits suicide. But not every gun owner has a group of black men break down their door and stand by while that gun owner gets off enough shots to become the hero...but we get that described in vivid detail here. We don't get it described in vivid detail how someone's 7 year old found their unlocked gun and blew their friend's face off. We don't get it described in vivid detail how someone's teenager has a runin with a bully and then winds up deciding that's not going to happen again, hurting themselves or the other kid. We get the hero fantasy described. Everyone feels good about that emotion. It's power, and we like power. But when something goes wrong...why that's just an accident. It can't be blamed on the product and we shouldn't do anything to make it safer. No, like everything else in life, when something goes wrong, we don't blame the product, we blame the person making the mistake. If you own a gun and someone accidentally gets shot, it's because you f***ed up and made a mistake, just like running a red light and hitting something with your car. It's not the cars fault, it's your fault for operating the car the wrong way. If your seven year old gets ahold of the gun, you made a mistake. If you have a teenager with a problem, and he gets your gun, you made a mistake. That doesn't make guns anymore dangerous because some asshole somewhere shoots up a school or some negligent gun owner allowed his kids to get his guns. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts