The right to Hunt People - Has the Constitution Overstepped its Bounds?

Originally posted by Doom and Gloom

Sorry , but if someone is following me, and I think they have a gun, I am going to kill them. Call it fantasy if you want to...

Why did you even start a thread, you are obviously in support of self defense and a person having the ability to take the life of another?

Assault weapons are for hunting people, and should only be issued to folks authorized to hunt people, but because of the second amendment, assault weapons are allowed, and their only use is to hunt people.

Originally posted by sensible1

Originally posted by Doom and Gloom

Sorry , but if someone is following me, and I think they have a gun, I am going to kill them. Call it fantasy if you want to...

Why did you even start a thread, you are obviously in support of self defense and a person having the ability to take the life of another?

Assault weapons are for hunting people, and should only be issued to folks authorized to hunt people, but because of the second amendment, assault weapons are allowed, and their only use is to hunt people.

This kind of idiotic reply throws any bit of credibility you might have had right out the window. Looks like we're done here. Thanks for playing!!

Originally posted by Klassified
You're looking at the whole situation backward.

It isn't the fact that this mad man had a gun. It's the fact that those who should have been able to defend the defenseless, couldn't, because they were unarmed.

This is what happens when you arm criminals and nutjobs better than you arm your citizenry. This is what happens when you give an inanaimate object a life, and a personality, and teach people to be afraid of it, instead of teaching them its proper place and use, en masse.

edit on 12/19/2012 by Klassified because: (no reason given)

Yeah, if only those 5-6 yr olds had guns...
Your reply is disgusting... You are blaming the children and teachers for this dispicable act. They were not armed.. YOU are what disgusts people about the NRA, and why that organization is in hiding right now..

reply to post by OptimusSubprime

In fact, the 2nd amendment only applies to the Federal Government

A question from a non-American. If the 2nd Amendment only applies to the Federal Government does that not means that all the Amendments only apply to the Federal Government?

I don't understand the context of the statement and how you can plead one of the Amendments , such as the 5th, if that is the case. Are you saying these are only legal pleas in a Federal case? Surely if that is so then they have no weight.

Originally posted by GMan420

Originally posted by sensible1

Originally posted by Doom and Gloom

Sorry , but if someone is following me, and I think they have a gun, I am going to kill them. Call it fantasy if you want to...

Why did you even start a thread, you are obviously in support of self defense and a person having the ability to take the life of another?

Assault weapons are for hunting people, and should only be issued to folks authorized to hunt people, but because of the second amendment, assault weapons are allowed, and their only use is to hunt people.

This kind of idiotic reply throws any bit of credibility you might have had right out the window. Looks like we're done here. Thanks for playing!!

You seriously blame the kids and teachers? Seriously?

Originally posted by sensible1

Originally posted by GMan420

Originally posted by sensible1

Originally posted by Doom and Gloom

Sorry , but if someone is following me, and I think they have a gun, I am going to kill them. Call it fantasy if you want to...

Why did you even start a thread, you are obviously in support of self defense and a person having the ability to take the life of another?

Assault weapons are for hunting people, and should only be issued to folks authorized to hunt people, but because of the second amendment, assault weapons are allowed, and their only use is to hunt people.

This kind of idiotic reply throws any bit of credibility you might have had right out the window. Looks like we're done here. Thanks for playing!!

You seriously blame the kids and teachers? Seriously?

There were kids and teachers involved in the Martin/Zimmerman situation?? I had no idea.


I know you had both in your OP but we were specifically talking about Martin/Zimmerman until you changed that up.... which situation do you want to focus on? We can't have a meaningful conversation if you are going to jump back and forth between them....


And I'll stand by my statement that your post above ("assault weapons are for hunting people") is asinine either way and throws away any credibility you might have still had.

Originally posted by OptimusSubprime
reply to post by sensible1

 

The Constitution can not overstep it's bounds, however people can in their application of it. Having said that, your question is somewhat ridiculous. Zimmerman was not acting lawfully when he decided to pursue Trayvon Martin, therefore Florida's Castle Law did not apply. Also, Florida's Castle Law is not the 2nd amendment of the US Constitution. In fact, the 2nd amendment only applies to the Federal Government, and Zimmerman was in violation of a state law, and this fact nullifies your original point.

According to the second amendment, Zimmerman was acting lawfully when he was carrying a gun while stalking an innocent person for no reason other than "looking suspicious"

reply to post by sensible1


I believe the right to own guns is a double edged sword. Good people who do not hurt others have the right to defend themselves. Alot of fundamental laws, common law, constitution etc were put it place to protect people from corrupt power. I people have to lay down there guns then so should the Government. I believe people should protect themselves but at the same time there are a lot of idiots out there who turn to violence to solve their problems, A product of the deigned society with live in. check out my website for some good info

www.NewWorldNewAge.com...

Originally posted by sensible1
According to the second amendment, Zimmerman was acting lawfully when he was carrying a gun while stalking an innocent person for no reason other than "looking suspicious"

Listen, I'd be the first one to say the Zimmerman was overzealous when he continued to follow Martin after the police told him not to, but he was a member of the neighborhood watch. It was his 'duty' to his neighbors to make sure no one is up to anything unlawful in the neighborhood. "Looking suspicious' was justification in his mind, and 'carrying a gun' is his right.

I'm going to stop here since I'm assuming you're either trolling or unable to listen to reason.

Let's see Obama has a secret kill list of american citizens he has labeled as terrorist. One person dead so far because he didn't like his speech. Is that in our constitution? Sounds like our own president is 'hunting people'.

The hypocrisy of Obama ,with his kill list, going to gather a task force to figure out how to take innocent citizens guns. Travon martins pretend dad, Obama, doesn't care about the constitution or anybodys rights.

Originally posted by OptimusSubprime
In fact, the 2nd amendment only applies to the Federal Government

For accuracy sake the Supreme Court has stated otherwise regarding this. In District of Columbia v. Heller, the Supreme Court ruled that the 2nd Amendment isn't solely an issue related to Federal Government but to States and the People thereof.

It is also why each of the 50 states have the similar language that echos the 2nd Amendment.

Originally posted by PuterMan
reply to post by OptimusSubprime

 

In fact, the 2nd amendment only applies to the Federal Government

A question from a non-American. If the 2nd Amendment only applies to the Federal Government does that not means that all the Amendments only apply to the Federal Government?

I don't understand the context of the statement and how you can plead one of the Amendments , such as the 5th, if that is the case. Are you saying these are only legal pleas in a Federal case? Surely if that is so then they have no weight.

His statement is false. The amendments are typically restrictions placed upon the Federal Government and some amendments are declaration of a specific right, such as the First Amendment and Second Amendment. Each of those are reaffirming Rights held by the People but also restrict the Federal Government from abridging those Rights.

Further, each of the States mimic or go further in their own Bills of Rights, reaffirming the Federal Constitution's enumerations. The last step is the application of the 9th and 10th Amendments. The 9th, declares that the enumerated Rights in the first eight amendments is not to be construed as an end-all list. The 10th, of course states what ever is not stated in the Constitution is held to the States and the People respectively.

reply to post by sensible1

Do you often skim posts, instead of reading and comprehending them?

I said nothing about arming those children. Nor did I say those teachers were to blame for anything. They did what they could with what they had.

As to the NRA, they have never been a trustworthy organization to begin with. They were always in it for the money they could bilk from their members, and they still are. They're not in hiding, they're in waiting.

But you keep on spewing that hatred...

reply to post by Klassified


You said this tragedy happened because the people in the school should have been armed. That is disgusting and undefensible. I don't want to even have a conversation with you. Those brave teachers and babies were innocent.. Your selfish lust for firearms and your second amendment rights are evidently more important than they are.. Absolutely repulsive and sickening.. The great majority of Americans disagree with you.. Assault weapons will be banned,(without doubt by the middle of 2013) so go and spend your $1500 and get another one now.

reply to post by sensible1

You obviously have a problem comprehending what you read, so I'll leave you to your enraged psychosis.