View Single Post
Old 01-10-2013, 10:53 AM   #754
Ring of Famer

Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 6,323

Originally Posted by BroncoBeavis View Post
Of course its a compromise. And nobody's talking about the 'letter' of the Constitution. Although that's the game the "It only means Militia" people like to play.

But there's little coherence to the Constitutional argument that we should simultaneously be militarizing the police while disarming the public. There's no honest interpretation of the 2nd Amendment which allows for that.

Going back to you worrying about what I 'need' in a gun. I own a useless .22 and a Winchester deer rifle (.270) Both have seen better days. But it's not about what I personally need. It's about whether a citizen has the right to present a credible resistance to a (theoretically) corrupt government. That's exactly why the 2nd Amendment was written.
There is absolutely nothing anyone can do to protect themselves from our government if they should decide to enslave the populace. Nothing. If you think even an armed populace has a snowball's chance if the government turned on us, you're out of your ever-loving gourd. And it's been that way since Day 1. Furthermore, you keep arguing that the framers wanted guns for the citizens to keep the government from oppressing them, yet again, you neglect to even give treatment to the purposeful inclusion of "well-trained militia" into the Amendment. This is all over and above the fact that the framers themselves, as W*GS pointed out, were the ones to put down the Whiskey Rebellion. "Arm yourselves to protect yourselves from us, because here we come!" doesn't sound like a conclusion that the logical men who wrote the Constitution would have come to.

Originally Posted by Haroldthebarrel View Post
If there was a guarantee of 100% that there would be no more school shootings if you handed in your gun. Would you do it?
Personally speaking, based on the fact that there is no evidence that owning a gun or possessing one either on your person or in your home actually has any effect on crime, and based on the fact that the majority of gun accidents occur in homes that have guns, I would be in favor of the following legislation:

- Permanent ban on assault weapons
- Permanent ban on magazines larger than 10 rounds
- Permanent ban on rifles over a certain muzzle velocity capable of semi-automatic fire
- Permanent ban of on-site storage of firearms where there is a resident under the age of 18

You can own certain types of firearms, no limit to number of firearms or number of ammunition, just types. You can own them, and if you have children in the home, you can store them off-site at a place like a gun club or Gander Mountain. You can still teach your kids gun safety and take them hunting, and the gun clubs and stores can charge a small nominal fee for secure storage.
houghtam is offline   Reply With Quote