Someone explain to me how our right to bear arms is NOT infringed?

Originally posted by 23refugee
reply to post by havok

 

You would think that after the Hurricane Katrina gun harvest this point would end any gun rights arguement

One would assume....
But then again I can't, for the life of me, agree with the anti-gun advocats.

...nor can I agree with liberals, but thats a personal issue.

I'm the one that thinks I should be given a government provided gun free of charge. Sort of like how lawyer are provided free of charge. To exercize my right to keep and bare arms I shouldnt have to pay up to do so. There is a such thing as gimmick rights where it takes money in order to exercize them. And that is just BS to me at least.

reply to post by havok


You would probably enjoy the shocked faces of my Montreal friends when I advocate for a persons right to arm themselves. The looks of befuddlement are hilarous when I point out that they are a gun-free populace in which any thug can walk around with a pitbull that they can't even aim.

I love how people choose to post gun death statistics and fail to mention that a large majority of deaths are done by unregistered firearms.

But then that wouldn't be convenient for your world view, so it makes sense anyways.

"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."

I've always heard that in today's vernacular, 'well regulated' would translate into 'well organized'.

I'm also of the mind that having to obtain a permit is an infringement. Personally, I've never carried a handgun. But I have been considering purchasing one lately.

Where i live you do not need a license to own a gun. I own many, what you do need is a license to conceal carry it. Do i disagree with that? Yes. I feel anyone who can pass the background check to own a gun should be considered responsible enought to carry it concealed. This is not the case however.
I am pro background checking potential gun owners to keep the guns (legally) out of the hands of felons. I dont think you should need to license them though. I also agree on some restrictions on certain weapons, automatic and explosive weapons basically. I own my fair share of 'assault' rifles and i dont see why id need to own the automatic version or why id need a grenade launcher. Seems like an expensive way to waste expensive ammo.

reply to post by havok


Simple answer - the right IS infringed.

Some people are led by this dizzying belief that by regulating guns with licensing and registration that gun crime would somehow go down - when in reality 90% of guns used in firearm related crimes are obtained illegally and carried without a permit regardless.

Proponents against the right to bear arms would fruitlessly argue otherwise even though the statistics speak for themselves.



People speak of using logic, how about this logic. If every person had a gun on them at all times, do you think that criminals would:

A. Commit more acts of crime and violence regardless of a firearm on a person.

or

B. Rethink acts of crime or violence knowing that a person is armed and lethal.



Common sense, for any sane person, would point to option B. Thus, if firearms were provided openly instead of so closely regulated, firearm crime would take a drastic drop.










As far as the comments made about our documents being outdated, that is why we have the ability to amend said documents in a legal manner. However, the original texts were made as literally, quite clear guidelines to anyone who decides to research it. As far as the whole "interpretation" of documents like the Constitution, I honestly don't think there is any room for "interpretation" and the excuse is thrown about simply to push ones agendas in a SUPPOSED legal way. The Constitution is plain and simple in its wording unlike the laws of today. I don't hear anyone questioning the "interpretations" of some of the laws we are forces to abide to every single day.

"Tyranny is not safe without disarming the people"

People who ignore and abrogate their responsibility to maintain a free state must understand: No Totalitarian government ever came into power without first disarming the citizens.

Just ask the 50 million victims of MAO, STALIN & HILTER how gun-control worked for them.

The U.S. 1968 gun control act was modeled after NAZI gun-control laws.
Source: Jews for the preservation of firearms.


Why Switzerland Has The Lowest Crime Rate In The World







[edit on 19-4-2010 by zzombie]

Originally posted by 23refugee
There purpose of an armed populace is to prevent tyrrany by the government.

Do you really believe your little pop-guns can prevent tyranny by the government?? I mean - REALLY??? Consider for a moment the awesome irresistible power they could bring to the fight against you. Consider the shock and awe. Consider dead neo-confederates by the millions bulldozed into mass graves because they are too numerous to give a proper burial. Your weapons are nothing. You are as powerless armed as you are disarmed. And while you are doing all that considering, consider that there are better, smarter means of accomplishing ones political aims than resorting to violent suicidal/terroristic behavior.

reply to post by XyZeR


XYZER is a little flawed in his thinking--all the countries he listed are not mixed race like america is--???
All the countries he lists arent as young as ours with a history of recent revolution an a grand scale.
All the countries he lists are not as frightened as ours now that all the 1000 lies are out of the bag--overpopulation-theft of our government -theft of our monies fom taxes-global warming-melt-down of banks-recources getting scarce-false wars for domination-killing our own people-[911-wako-ruby ridge-oklahoma-viet-nam-even all the way back to when patton and mccarther fired and burned our own vets in washington--gmo foods with round-up]poison inside just for the love of us- I COULD GO ON ALL NIGHT!
Ya i would say i am glad we arent on his list-xyzer is a sheep--
The book UNINTENDED CONSQUENCES states how all are gun rights have been attacked since the begining and is a ongoing plan to disarm for slavery.
OUR RIGHT TO BARE ARMS INCLUDES ALL THAT THE GOVERNMENT FEILD SOLDIER HAS --NO LESS NO MORE------go read its a good book
I bet the jews wish they were armed now that they lost so many to HITLER-THE BIGEST FED

I'm glad carrying your gun around town makes you feel safe. I sure as hell wouldn't feel safe with you standing next to me in line somewhere with your gun hanging out. I'm not going to feel better knowing your having dinner in my restaurant and your packing in case some mugger runs in and tries to hold me up.

Your causing more problems then you think it's solving. If I actually saw you rolling around with your gun I would be inclined to call someone and make sure your allowed to have it. I don't feel safe when people around me have guns. People are too flawed to be carrying around something that can do so much damage.

I live in Kentucky, we have open carry and conceal carry laws. Our law enforcement does a piss poor job and our judicial system is a joke here. Murderers get 10 year sentences and the majority of our officers (or perhaps their administration) are more concerned with traffic tickets. I work at a hotel and I've been held up twice and we've had 1 shooting which resulted in 2 deaths from a drug deal gone wrong in our parking lot, all within the past year. I carry a pistol in my vehicle and I always keep it in the cash drawer at work. I don't ever want to have to use it. Thats why I carry; for protection. In the time it takes to call the police I could be shot dead, and whats worse if I'm ever in a situation where I have to lock up and stay put, why should I have to wait 5 minutes for help to arrive... those 5 minutes are precious time and it could mean life or death for me. In fact I honestly feel safer when the gun shows come to town. I know there are 100 rooms with firearms owners, RESPONSIBLE firearms owners. When I see a normal person with a gun displayed, I think they're either military, law enforcement, or a responsible gun owner. I don't think they're a gun crazed psycho or that they're a nut who needs to be locked up. We've been conditioned that if we see someone carrying a gun, they must be a criminal, which couldn't be farther from the truth.

reply to post by VintageEnvy


Who are you to judge so prematurely?

For a single minute go ahead and think, or hell look up, just how many people in this country own guns. Now, go ahead and find how many gun crimes took place in the United States in comparison to that number.

Let me paint a picture for you, roughly 25% of all people in the United States own a gun. The most recent statistic for firearms offenses I could find personally was from the year 2000. Keep in mind that gun crimes have been lowering each year since then.

In 2000, 75,685 people were INJURED from gun related incidents while 28,874 were killed by gun related incidents. 58% of that number was suicide, which means it was a self inflicted gunshot wound so let's recheck that number subtracting that:

12,127 people were MURDERED by guns while 75,685 were injured bringing the total to 87,812.

25% of the US population 70,355,477. Over 70 million people who owned firearms.

IF and only if we consider that those gun crimes that are so bad were all singular offenses committed by different people, that means that because of the actions of about 88 thousand people, YOU and others decide to demonize the other 70,267,665 gun owners of the United States.




So the logic behind opponents of the second amendment believe this grand statement:

Because of the actions of .12% of all gun owners in the United States, the other 99.88% should be forced to be licensed and should be looked upon as common criminals that should be monitored and watched for fear of disturbing your peace.


These are statistics. These are facts. The only reason for anyone to not feel safe around gun owners is because of the fear mongering spewed by those who wish to derail the Constitution by any means necessary. You have more of a chance of dying by the good graces of mother nature than you do of a gun related incident.


Deny ignorance but most of all, deny arrogance.

If this country actually cared about its people it wouldn't worry so much about taking the guns away from people or monitoring them, but educating them on gun safety and self defense - things that will actually HELP them.

reply to post by Lilitu


So, any person choosing to excercise a constitutional right is either suicidal or a terrorist. REALLY? REALLY?
You're welcome to continue protesting from cordoned off areas, voting on easily manipulated machines, and pleading with your elected representative.
Your accusations of militancy toward those you disagree with only accelerate the nation toward your own dire predictions.
I too fear an oppressive government. The first oppression that should be stopped is the disarming of the citizenry. This is a straw that will break the camels back.
No matter what I think, millions live by the mottos "Give Me Liberty or Give Me Death" and "Live Free or Die".

reply to post by gwydionblack


If I have more chance to die from something in mother nature then why do you feel the urgent urgency to carry a weapon around to protect you (or be taken and used by someone else against you) from other people with guns? If it's so rare a form of death then why need one to 'protect' yourself?

I also don't run outside during a tornado or swim across a flooding lake, I dont want to sit down next to someone whos carrying a gun at subway. I cant even drive to work without someone flipping me off, lets not add guns to this mess.

Originally posted by VintageEnvy
I'm glad carrying your gun around town makes you feel safe. I sure as hell wouldn't feel safe with you standing next to me in line somewhere with your gun hanging out. I'm not going to feel better knowing your having dinner in my restaurant and your packing in case some mugger runs in and tries to hold me up.

Your causing more problems then you think it's solving. If I actually saw you rolling around with your gun I would be inclined to call someone and make sure your allowed to have it. I don't feel safe when people around me have guns. People are too flawed to be carrying around something that can do so much damage.

You should call the authorities for everyone you see with car keys or a pocket knife too, considering people are killed with vehicles and knives too. That guy with an ipod? Ipod's use batteries, batteries carry electricity, electricity kills people. Get him too.


YOU are the reason we are in this predicament.

Originally posted by VintageEnvy
reply to post by gwydionblack

 

If I have more chance to die from something in mother nature then why do you feel the urgent urgency to carry a weapon around to protect you (or be taken and used by someone else against you) from other people with guns? If it's so rare a form of death then why need one to 'protect' yourself?

I also don't run outside during a tornado or swim across a flooding lake, I dont want to sit down next to someone whos carrying a gun at subway. I cant even drive to work without someone flipping me off, lets not add guns to this mess.

Someone should study our founding fathers more.

That is all I am saying on that spiel.

Originally posted by Lemon.Fresh
You should call the authorities for everyone you see with car keys or a pocket knife too, considering people are killed with vehicles and knives too. That guy with an ipod? Ipod's use batteries, batteries carry electricity, electricity kills people. Get him too.

YOU are the reason we are in this predicament.

In all honesty, if I saw someone walking around with their pocket knife open out and in their hand, I would call someone cause why would they need to be doing that? The car keys I knew would be brought up at some point because their are so many car accident related deaths. The batteries are a stupid example and you know it. It ranks up there with 'why dont I call somone with a cheeseburger because a.)the cholesterol could lead to a heart attack and kill them b.) people have chocked on them and died'

Those are bad analogies. Carrying your gun around isnt because it's practical like a few of your examples. Its stupid and dangerous and unfair to other people. It's your right in a lot of states and I respect that but I'm for gun control and don't want to be around them, ever.

Originally posted by XyZeR
How does the bible say it again: He who lives by the sword..... (replace sword by handgun....)

How does it say in the Bible again: "Whoever does not have one let him sell his clothes and buy a sword." Jesus speaking to his disciples in the Gospel of Luke.

And how does it say in the Constitution again: 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.

Jesus Christ knew and the Founders of America knew that Freedom is impossible without a means of defending that Freedom. When the government itself becomes the Enemy of the People, the People MUST have a means of defending their Freedom.

— Doc Velocity

In all honesty, if I saw someone walking around with their pocket knife open out and in their hand, I would call someone cause why would they need to be doing that?

Well I agree with you here, I would be apt to call the authorities if I witnessed someone walking into a coffee shop with a Glock in his hand...however I believe that is common sense.

We are talking about someone walking with a holstered weapon, that is equivalent to having a pocket knife on your belt, or in your pocket...

A holstered firearm is no more a threat to you than a utility or hunting knife hanging on someone's belt.