The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Conference Center > Law and Civil Rights

Closed Thread
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old December 26, 2012, 08:31 PM   #1
Senior Member
Join Date: March 29, 2009
Location: NW Ohio
Posts: 569
A few thoughts

Seems everywhere I go both in real life and on the internet, there is talk of guns and rights...I can't seem to get away from it no matter where I am. So here are just a few random things that have come to mind when people prattle on with their antigun rants.

People like to rehash the Presidents tired statement about getting weapons of war off the streets. AR15's aren't what the founders had in mind when they wrote the 2nd Amendment.

Weren't weapons of war exactly what civillians had when the 2nd Amendment was written. True, there is no way they could have envisioned an AR15, however does that make the amendment less relevant? If so, does a website, blog, television show, radio show, Flying Spaghetti Monster based religion deserve less than the full protections offered by the 1st Amendment? Surely these things could not have been concieved or dreamed of when the Bill of Rights was written.

Nobody needs high capacity clips.

Does that list of nobody include law enforcement, military, armed security? Well they are exempt. Why? Because they might run into a situation where they need that many bullets. What about the rest of us? Are we not to be afforded the same "fighting chance" when it comes to magazine capacity? Something about that whole life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness thing.....I quite enjoy living and somebody who is going to try to cause me harm or kill me most certainly would interfere with my pursuit of happiness.

Nobody needs to have guns.

Nobody needs a car. Ride a bike, take the bus, or walk. Nobody needs jewelry. Nobody needs an Ipod. The list could go on and on for days about things people don't need.

All guns do is kill people.

As do cigarettes. I'm betting they have caused more deaths in this country than guns. Nothing good can come from a cigarette, yet they are completely legal. Wheres the public outrage over that? Wheres the outrage over gas station loopholes where underage people get their hands on cigarettes?

They should register guns like cars and make you get a license.

Interesting. There are people who commit numerous crimes with their vehicles, DUI's,speeding, getting into accidents without insurance, hit and runs....yet they still have the legal right to drive and buy vehicles. So would this mean you could rob a bank, get out of prison and be eligible to purchase firearms again? Licenses?? Does that mean a prolific number of public ranges will be built? We can cross state lines with a firearm without fear of violating any laws? Will eminent domain be used to get rid of that one lone house holding up the development of a new public rifle range?

Sorry, just needed to get that off my chest.

Last edited by Tom Servo; December 27, 2012 at 10:36 PM.
cryogenic419 is offline  
Old December 27, 2012, 11:37 AM   #2
Senior Member
Join Date: August 8, 2012
Posts: 2,556
The names you're looking for, that I got from This Wiki entry
would be Priscilla Joyce Ford, George Russel Weller, Matthew Tvrdon, And others. Drill down through the links, and you can find a fairly expansive list of people who perpetrated the same horrors using knives, arson, bombs, and cars.
JimDandy is offline  
Old December 27, 2012, 12:00 PM   #3
Senior Member
Join Date: June 20, 2011
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,179
One thing I think most people forget is that the men who wrote 2A were the ones that rebelled against a tyrannical government, the government of England. That was not a foreign government. The colonies were a part of England. The colonists were not fighting criminals, Indians, of natural threats as much as their own oppressive government. This is why 2A says the government cannot infringe our right to keep and bear arms. 2A is to keep the government in line. Why should government agents (police and military) be allowed arms that the people they are supposed to work for are denied. I don't want private missiles, grenades, tanks, etc., but why should I be limited to ten rounds when one of the biggest threats to freedom is allowed high capacity mags, full auto weapons, grenades, armored vehicles, etc.

I am not knocking police or military. They are instruments of the civilian government, which is the biggest threat to freedom. I am not an anarchist either. It is just that I remember history lessons and watch the world news.
This is my gun. There are many like her, but this one is mine.

I'm not old. I'm CLASSIC!
KMAX is offline  
Old December 27, 2012, 10:36 PM   #4
Tom Servo
Join Date: September 27, 2008
Location: Foothills of the Appalachians
Posts: 12,158
All of these issues are currently under discussion in other threads. Closing for redundancy.
Sometimes it’s nice not to destroy the world for a change.
--Randall Munroe
Tom Servo is offline  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:29 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2017 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent:
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.05865 seconds with 8 queries