Weaponry; Discussion of Rights and Responsibilities

[vannax]

In the end, there are those who recognize "The right of the people to bear arms", and then there are those who do not.

Unlike the right/left political divide, in the end, there are those who want individuals to be free, and then there are those who do not. Its a Hobbs/Locke thing.

[mizlaplan]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MXrNj3t6Vxo
There you go. Problem solved
Yes I know it's a cartoon but compared with modern US gun policy.....
I have to admit I'm filled with admiration for all our American members who survive day to day in an unregulated firearm-heavy society.
Stout fellows, well done.
Miz, in the UK (gawd bless/help it), wary of knives but not that bothered about nutters with guns.

[Rogerbh]

I have never seen a crime committed with a gun myself. However my brother has twice seen a black man kill a black man in casinos in Las Vegas - with pistols - each time the security had the perp pinned to the ground in the time it took for him to notice what was going on.

[Arturo2nd]

Checking the statistics from various sources 36% of American households own at least one gun. 3% of the population owns over half the guns. We are talking collectors, people who hunt game, and the criminal and militia types who have stockpiled arsenals. Criminals will obviously evade any laws to acquire weapons by extra legal means.

Thus, it seems to me that laws designed to keep guns out of the hands of the population at large are misguided. What is needed are better methods of catching and convicting violent criminals, and better methods of keeping guns out of the hands of whack jobs and people who lack impulse control and good judgment.

Perhaps, we need a program of universal gun safety education. I know that my realization at a Boy Scout summer camp that I was a really bad shot is one factor in my never seeking to own a gun. It would make African American communities much safer if we could convince teenage males that they are unlikely to hit their adversaries and very likely to hurt innocent bystanders.

[vannax]

“A liberal’s paradise would be a place where everybody has guaranteed employment, free comprehensive healthcare, free education, free food, free housing, free clothing, free utilities, and only law enforcement has guns.
And believe it or not, such a place does indeed already exist:

..It's called Prison".. 
Sheriff Joe Arpaio

[profvolup]

Originally Posted by vannax

In the end, there are those who recognize "The right of the people to bear arms", and then there are those who do not.

Unlike the right/left political divide, in the end, there are those who want individuals to be free, and then there are those who do not. Its a Hobbs/Locke thing.

Indeed.

Although I'm also the first person to point out the same arguments made against guns is also against a woman's right to choose for her own body, and this includes various state laws to make it impossible to exercise the civil right. I'm not trying to create a tangent, but to focus on the Hobbs/Locke comment. That people will make whatever argument they want, taking statistics and facts out-of-context, to convince people.

Because in the end ... I trust people more than the government, at least for themselves.

Unfortunately my argument seems to fly back in my face when I say the people when it comes to voting. That people don't take that civil right responsibly. Such as just voting party lines and feeling they cannot leave something they know nothing about blank. I honestly wish people would leave things blank, especially amendments as much as votes for offices.

Don't vote in ignorance any more you would carry a gun or modify your body.

[Arturo2nd]

Originally Posted by profvolup

Because in the end ... I trust people more than the government, at least for themselves.

Unfortunately my argument seems to fly back in my face when I say the people when it comes to voting. That people don't take that civil right responsibly. Such as just voting party lines and feeling they cannot leave something they know nothing about blank. I honestly wish people would leave things blank, especially amendments as much as votes for offices.

Don't vote in ignorance any more you would carry a gun or modify your body.

I do read the provided voter information and research candidates and issues. I also have a simple rule: Vote 'NO' on all bond issues, ballot initiatives, and taxes unless provided with overwhelming evidence to vote yes. Experience has shown that good idea or bad idea, it will turn up on the ballot again if voted down.

[vannax]

Originally Posted by profvolup

Indeed.

Although I'm also the first person to point out the same arguments made against guns is also against a woman's right to choose for her own body, and this includes various state laws to make it impossible to exercise the civil right. I'm not trying to create a tangent, but to focus on the Hobbs/Locke comment. That people will make whatever argument they want, taking statistics and facts out-of-context, to convince people.

Because in the end ... I trust people more than the government, at least for themselves.

Unfortunately my argument seems to fly back in my face when I say the people when it comes to voting. That people don't take that civil right responsibly. Such as just voting party lines and feeling they cannot leave something they know nothing about blank. I honestly wish people would leave things blank, especially amendments as much as votes for offices.

Don't vote in ignorance any more you would carry a gun or modify your body.

This may interest you, if you are not already familiar with it:

http://www.daviddfriedman.com/The_Ma...f_Freedom_.pdf

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jTYkdEU_B4o

[Faceman675]

Originally Posted by vannax

“A liberal’s paradise would be a place where everybody has guaranteed employment, free comprehensive healthcare, free education, free food, free housing, free clothing, free utilities, and only law enforcement has guns.
And believe it or not, such a place does indeed already exist:

..It's called Prison".. 
Sheriff Joe Arpaio

Gotta Luv Sheriff Joe

[Faceman675]

Originally Posted by vannax

"A good breakfast being essential to a healthy diet, the right of the people to keep food shall not be infringed"

Do you read that to mean that people may only keep food if they eat a good breakfast?

Thats brilliant. I am going to use this. Thanks.

The fact is that "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, ..." is a preamble not a qualifier. Unfortunately the use of preambles were far, far more common back when the constitution was written then they are now.

Even if it were the framers intent (it clearly wasn't) to make it a collective right it should also be pointed out that at the time it was written every white male over 15 years was expected to participate in the defense of the state which would effectively make it an individual right at that time.

Lucky for us there are other writings that make it clear that their intent was to grant an individual right