A question for the anti-gun people.

Mods if this is in the wrong forum, I apologize and ask you to please move it wherever it would be most appropriate.

My question to you who believe we should ban "assault weapons" is:

If it's such a no-brainer, so obvious that anybody but a "gun loving retard" can see it, that the guns need to go. Then why are you pursuing an end-around of the the constitution. Why aren't you doing it by the method that would make it legally justified. Why is there no proposal for a 28th amendment to the constitution abolishing the 2nd? Get it ratified by 38 states and then there is no right to keep arms, they become a privilege and can be as regulated as you desire.

I personally think it would be a horrible blow to liberty, but it would be acting in accordance with the constitution.

I would have to say, because the shills know full well that the majority of Americans want to keep their only means to deter a tyrannical government! I have to think they are shills, as nobody is that mentally challenged!

"Anti-gun people" are the LEAST intelligent people to ask for anything regarding the subject involving 1) firearms, 2) Constitution, 3) Rights of Americans, 4) And anything relating to... common sense.

They have shown CLEARLY time and time again whom the "retards" really are...

Are people who believe that fully automatic guns should be illegal labeled anti-gun?

Oh please, enough already.

Keep your guns, we're not bothered.

Now, how about some theoretical physics?

Originally posted by ajay59
I would have to say, because the shills know full well that the majority of Americans want to keep their only means to deter a tyrannical government! I have to think they are shills, as nobody is that mentally challenged!

Shills, Traitors, Bad-guys, and non-Americans...

...with an obvious agenda.

No common law-abiding American citizen that I have ever spoke with has ever been in favor of harsh gun laws or gun bans. As ignorant as the gun-haters are, one cannot help but think that these such folks here who push for gun bans are: 1) Bad guys, 2) Traitors/shills 3) Brainwashed or bitterly jealous non-Americans.

Their level of stupidity is unbelievably high. Too high to not raise red-flags.

reply to post by WaterBottle


I wouldn't consider that to be an anti-gun position regarding fully automatic firearms.
If the military and police are excluded from the "ban", I'd consider the position to be pro-authoritarian.
If you're making those guns illegal across the board - well that's a bit of a problem now isn't it because as it stand not only are fully automatic firearms legal, they're taxed and regulated heavily in the hands of private individuals.
Of course the problem with making them illegal in the USA wouldn't affect the rest of the world so our forces would be at a disadvantage.

AS I SEE IT - with the proposed ban on hi-cap magazines and the penalties for possession being contemplated, there's really no reason not to convert your semi-automatic firearms to fully automatic since you'd get more years in jail for the hi-cap magazines than the weapon itself. Law of unintended consequence applies here IMO.

ganjoa

Now the latest is that they are pushing for anyone who purchases a firearm must first go through gun-safety training! WTF? Extended background checks, gun-safety training, limited magazines, and it won't stop there. Soon it will be bolt-action only and/or no one with children under 18 in the house can purchase a firearm. Rather than an outright ban on firearms which they no will never pass, they have to chip away at it with one ridiculous regulation after another! Good Luck Lefties! "From our cold dead hands," will become a new national motto.

Originally posted by Taliesien333

If it's such a no-brainer,
Why is there no proposal for a 28th amendment to the constitution abolishing the 2nd?

Because no one , Regardless of how you are being played, wants to see the 2nd gone.

See , it is a no-brainer.

The problem isn't guns.

The problem is Americans worship them.

Originally posted by WaterBottle


Are people who believe that fully automatic guns should be illegal labeled anti-gun?

Sort of? A little, kind of?

Did you know that in the USA only 2 homicides related to legally owned "fully automatic" weapons have occurred since 1934, and one of those two homicides was committed by a police officer?

Perhaps what you think of as a "fully automatic" weapon differs? To me, fully automatic means it fires more than 1 bullet for each pull of the trigger, where "semi automatic" is one bullet per trigger pull.

From what I've seen, full-auto weaponry is kind of a rich-to-semi-rich mans game. In general they're more expensive to purchase, and WAY more expensive to shoot. I tend to think of them as a "money hose" where quarters to dollars spew out at an extremely rapid rate.

"Fully automatic" are Class 3 firearms if you got $4000 to $350,000 to blow, can afford to burn through the ammo pay a $200 tax stamp get an enema by the local,state,and federal government you can own a "fully automatic" firearm.

Most people are too poor.

Just goes to show all some people can do is repeat administration talking points.


www.everydaynodaysoff.com...

reply to post by neo96


Agree!

As I mentioned in a different thread, those black guns they keep putting up images of, and demonizing on TV are as much true "high-powered assault rifles" as a stock Dodge Neon with an aftermarket bolt-on spoiler, low profile tires, and a fart-can muffler is a true "race car".

reply to post by Taliesien333


Because the supreme court has already stated that gun regulations and bans on certain weapons are constitutional.
No amendment requiered.
Of course the only way
"A well regulated milita, necessary for the security of the state, the right of the people to bear arms shall not be infringed"
makes sense in the context of that "well regulated militia". Also note that it is not necessary for the security of the people, but of the state.
How do you feel on the quartiering of soldiers in private residences without compensation? (You know, the all important 3rd)

Originally posted by WaterBottle


Are people who believe that fully automatic guns should be illegal labeled anti-gun?

no, they should be labeled, "ignorant" because fully auto guns are already highly restricted.

1) They would if they could (abolish the 2nd A).
2) They have inertia on this insidious and growing infringement process.
What I would like to ask them is do they support Gun Control ex post facto for Stalin, Hitler, Mao and Castro????

reply to post by Taliesien333


There's lots of people calling for a repeal of the second amendment. There's just no politicians submitting legislation to do so.

A lot of liberals believe in the right to bear arms...but, like a lot of conservatives, believe there should be some limits to that. Felons, certifiably crazy people, etc.

Some liberals even go so far as to suggest you should know how to shoot a gun before owning one.

sorry i didn't reall understand the question.
i'm not against gun's. but i dont see why you need assault rifle's. if your on a battlefield then i'd understand.

also dont you already have a tyranical government?
you wont fight back until they take away your fast food and tv.

I was a nerd. Hell, I still am a nerd. When I was a kid, I got the Dungeons & Dragons original red box set, with the solo "Kill the Rust Monster" Quest to start you off. I played D&D off and on through my youth/young adult life.

One important lesson I learned from D&D so many years ago holds true when debating Liberals (and sometimes Conservatives as well!):

The Stat "Intelligence" related to book smarts.
The stat "Wisdom" related to common sense and street smarts.
Wiki

Intelligence (INT): Intelligence is similar to IQ, but also includes mnemonic ability, reasoning and learning ability outside those measured by the written word.

Wisdom (WIS): Wisdom is a composite term for the character's enlightenment, judgment, wile, willpower and intuitiveness.

On gun rights, Liberals brag about their INT scores, but have WIS scores so low they don't even realize how screwed up their thinking is!

Originally posted by Rikku
sorry i didn't reall understand the question.
i'm not against gun's. but i dont see why you need assault rifle's. if your on a battlefield then i'd understand.

also dont you already have a tyranical government?
you wont fight back until they take away your fast food and tv.

A) They aren't assault rifles. They are military style semi automatic weapons. They have no more potential to kill than a "traditional looking" rifle. It's like wanting to ban red cars because they go faster. They are not, I repeat, not fully automatic.

B) Google the 1992 Los Angeles Riots. You'll find that in a Major US metropolitan area, citizens were indeed trapped inside a battlefield of rioters. Police weren't coming in to save anyone. Several notable cases were documented where citizens needed those evil large capacity magazines to defend their families, homes and businesses.

C) We do have a tyrannical government. But it's better than most everyone else's. (UK bans guns, now they are marching empty handed in the street, mad about the "death pipeline". Knives are now looking to be banned, and martial arts training...But that could never happen here, right?)

We have been called a sleeping giant before, and it is still true. These guns (not the bolt actions) are a huge deterrent to those who want to tear down the US from within. That is why they want them so bad. These guns are a drop in the bucket when looking at US gun murders. You want to save the kids? Attack handguns. But they repeatedly attack black long guns. They want that deterrent out of our hands.

D) Actually, we will fight back if they try to take our guns. IMHO that's why the administration feinted (as in sword-play feinting) on the issue. They thought that maybe they could ram this through, using all those children to play our emotions. Biden was sent out to test the waters, 'leaking' the extreme options on the table. Our response to that was why Obama issued a bunch of "Executive Suggestions" on Mental Health.