Hands Off my Weapons!!!

External Source
The Second Amendment, as passed by the House and Senate and later ratified by the States, 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."

After reading quite a few posts by others on this site about how we don't need weapons anymore so we shouldn't have the right to own them. Mostly, by Foreigners who have already given up this right, or never had it to begin with.

It's getting old... Our founding fathers thought it pretty damn important to include this right in the "Bill of Rights." No where in the phrase I quoted above does it say... You have the right to bear arms... Just not Assault Weapons. You have the right to bear arms... As long as the Feds say it's OK.

How can anyone not see that in fact these rules... are obviously... Infringements?

[edit on 13-3-2007 by LostSailor]

Maybe Im just being paranoid but it seems like the more totalitarian a government becomes, the more I hear about an American Union, the more I hear about cameras and RFID chips, the more I hear about global taxation and all of this crap the more I hear from ordinary people how evil guns are and how Im a bad person for owning them.

Common sense would say the opposite should happen.

You keep your guns no matter what. And if them come for them make sure to send a few of them to hell before they send you to heaven.

Hear! Hear! American brothers!

I agree totally that our founding fathers decided that an armed populace was better off than an unarmed one. People say that it only pertains to millitia, BUT the phrase, "The right of the people" makes that argument moot. Guns are as american as apple pie, or so the saying goes. I think the more they press the gun issue, the more we will see republican controlled government.

I do get tired of hearing, "dont you think guns are bad?" every time I open a thread on the WEAPONS forum. Why is a weapons forum on ATS if it isnt to discuss weapons? I do understand that most foreigners think that americans are backwards for continuing to own guns. But thats just it! We arent like europe! We dont want to be like europe! thats why we broke away! We are Americans, not Europeans, and it seems to me that our way of life has served us just fine for 231 years.

Now, I am not saying europeans are weird, or bad, or anything of the sort. I am saying that we have a seperate culture.

Funny I have got no negative responses yet. Of course, I am sure they probably think I am a wack-job or something. I put this one in the slug-fest section for a reason!

Hows this people... If I had the money I would like to buy a friggin' tank!!!

ok, keep your weapons, but shouldn't there be limitations?

why don't we have psychological evaluations for anyone that wants to buy a weapon? why are there still situations where you can get a weapon without a background check?

You get a Tank, I want a ride!!!!!!

All that time in the Marines and NO TANK RIDE

As for your weapons, I will fight right beside of you to keep them.

As for limiting one of the Amendments....

OK, Lets say we limit the 2nd Amendment, (over my dead body LOL) then shouldn't we limit the 1st? Lets regulate the internet, after all there are tons of sexual predators on here. I catch them all the time..

How about that pesky 4th... Be a lot easier if I did not have to get a judge to sign a warrant... Why can't I go into your house anytime I want to and search it for illegal material?

Then, when we get that done, we go after the 14th and limit the states rights... WHOO HOOO, then we can have..... what? Russia? `1930's Germany?

Oh yeah, whittle away, limit to your hearts content, but then don't come crying when you lose all of your rights....

Semper

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
ok, keep your weapons, but shouldn't there be limitations?

why don't we have psychological evaluations for anyone that wants to buy a weapon? why are there still situations where you can get a weapon without a background check?

I believe i answered that question already. Semper, of course you can come along for a ride. Just don't try to give me a breathalyzer test... Just kidding!

I believe in the right to bear arms.

Problem is, gun violence is a complex issue. There are plenty of responsible people with guns in the US but also guns are much more easily acquired by criminals than in most other countries.

Basically, we need gun control. We need to make sure the crazy people don't get guns, but its not that simple. We need to really find a way to make it fair but to keep criminals from getting them.

How, I don't know.

Btw I've never even touched a real gun IRL just so you guys know.

Originally posted by LostSailor
I believe i answered that question already. Semper, of course you can come along for a ride. Just don't try to give me a breathalyzer test... Just kidding!

according to the logic you gave, that certain acts are in fact infringements, would mean that every man woman and child in america has the right to own a suitcase nuke

I used to be an anti-gun person but over the last ten years or so I have changed my mind completely.

In light of the dismantling of the constitution and the rise of the police state, I am now a fervent supporter of gun rights and although I don't own one (yet), I intend to purchase several.

Sorry for agreeing but I'm sure eventually someone will drop in with an opinion that's worthy of a slugfest.

[edit on 14-3-2007 by jblaze]

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
according to the logic you gave, that certain acts are in fact infringements, would mean that every man woman and child in america has the right to own a suitcase nuke

Last I checked a suitcase nuke was a bomb... Not a gun.

Originally posted by LostSailor
Last I checked a suitcase nuke was a bomb... Not a gun.

where in the second amendment does it limit "arms" to GUNS?

i've been rereading it over and over, all it says is "arms"

dictionary
arm2 [ahrm] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–noun
1. Usually, arms. weapons, esp. firearms.

Alright... You called me out. If you can get your hands on a nuclear bomb. I guess the 2nd amendment allows that.

[edit on 15-3-2007 by LostSailor]

I am a liberal, and generally on the left, so this may come as a surprise..

I fully support the 2nd amendment, and believe that most of the
limitations that the government has created are wrong and unconstitutional.

Personally I think people should be able to have any weapons short of
lethal nuclear/chemical/biological weapons.


My belief in this stems from two things.

1. Although it may not always be the case, in general when people are
not allowed to have weapons, the government becomes more authori-
tarian and oppressive.
2. I believe in absolute freedom as long as you are not directly
nonconsentually infringing on someone else's freedom.

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
ok, keep your weapons, but shouldn't there be limitations?

why don't we have psychological evaluations for anyone that wants to buy a weapon? why are there still situations where you can get a weapon without a background check?

Because **sigh, for having to point this out for what seems like the millionth time ** psych evaluations, laws and other restrictions, etc. have done nothing to prevent the criminals and other bad people from obtaining a gun or other weapon if they want one.

Look at the U.K. as I pointed out in another thread. They banned handguns (to curb violence) and what has happened? Now they are planning to ban samurai swords because the criminals have switched to swords for attacks on now defenseless citizens and eachother.

So totally

Originally posted by centurion1211
Because **sigh, for having to point this out for what seems like the millionth time ** psych evaluations, laws and other restrictions, etc. have done nothing to prevent the criminals and other bad people from obtaining a gun or other weapon if they want one.

but it prevents people who have severe mental problems from LEGALLY getting a gun.

Look at the U.K. as I pointed out in another thread. They banned handguns (to curb violence) and what has happened? Now they are planning to ban samurai swords because the criminals have switched to swords for attacks on now defenseless citizens and eachother.

So totally

wow, you're being so condescending
get off your high horse and stop the assumptions, i'm not talking about banning guns
i'm talking about putting restrictions in place

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
but it prevents people who have severe mental problems from LEGALLY getting a gun.

Just a thought... Who decides what can be considered a mental disorder? If it's the government issuing the license. What's to stop them from considering militia types mental? Again... Just a thought.

if you look behind the rhetoric of gun control you find the actual agenda is control, control of the people. crime and terrorism are just smoke and mirrors in this, does anyone recall a gun control law that actually reduced crime. there is no desire for crime reduction if the law did actually reduce crime then you would not be able to be panicked into surrendering even more of your rights. so when some pious jackass in a suit appeals to you to vote for him or her because they will fight gun crime, look to your rights that what they are asking to limit.

I'd like to add something.

Gun control is not always ineffectual, however it does'nt alays work either.

In some situation gun control, or banning guns has actually made for a
better society, however in other cases it has done nohting but to increase
crime rates, and make further criminals out of people who owned guns.

well then your experience is very different than mine i can't think of a single situation that gun control ever caused a criminal to pause and say whoa wait this is illegal so i better no use this gun I'll take this other one it legal. when did that speed limit sign ever " force " you to slow down. now having said that i too believe in some types of gun control, the ability to check to see if you are a felon, insane, or in some way disabled from the ownership of weapons through your past actions. the limiting from general ownership of weapons of mass destruction, and a few others but if i had to choose total banning of weapons or total freedom to own i would choose freedom.