Do you support the second amendment?

  • Thread starter Thread starter thephilosopher6
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
If we can find a better way to keep guns out of criminal hands while still
allowing good people who want them to protect their family, I’m all for it.

The only thing I think taking guns away will do is take them away from the
good people, while the bad people still have them. Criminals buy guns
often times, illegally. Not all the time (like this crazy guy), but a lot
of times.

Take guns away from gangs, they will go back to using knives. Gang members
can do some pretty horrible things with knives.

Killers kill, they get a power trip out of it. They might use a gun,
knife, a baseball bat, their fists, feet, etc.

Getting rid of guns might reduce the number of killings resulting from a
panicked criminal or a stray bullet (which I believe there are far too many
of), but it could lead to more stabbings and green light other crimes.

My point (as someone who does not like guns) is that we can’t be rash and
need to understand the pros and cons of each action.

One suggestion I have, which often shot down by both sides is allowing
local (not state) referendums to beta test gun controls/laws on a local
level. But both sides reject it right away.

Basically, the two parties have different philosophical view points in
direct conflict regarding crime: Republicans believe that individuals are
100% responsible for the action they take, while Democrats believe that
social conditions are equally to blame.

The only way to really solve this problem is to fix the family and stop
having deadbeat dad’s, but Democrats continue with their support of the
selfish me, me, me culture

God Bless
 
Last edited:
upant said:
worked for drugs
Click to expand...
Funny how it is the same ideologically aligned group that is pushing against controls on psychotropic drugs who are the ones who are pushing for gun control. Why would that be? Seems to me that the only connector between the two positions is that causing more mayhem in society will lead to the people asking for more state control and more state control will certainly be more easily accomplished over a people that are largely disarmed. Incorporating a collective state, first nationally and then globally requires first producing the motivation to have one – a breakdown of society and social cohesion – and then absolute control over dissenting voices. The latter is greatly facilitated by taking away the ability of ordinary citizens to defend themselves.

Given that these political positions have converging trajectories, there is good reason to be wary about which political bodies are pushing which agendas.

Clearly, we have wealthy politically aligned elites openly advocating for collectivist unions of nations heading towards one globalist political entity. There is good reason to be concerned about that.

And it isn’t the Kingdom of Heaven that they are pushing for.
 
Last edited:
Brendan said:
Here is a video on how to machine your own AR-15 from a block of aluminum. Not only are the block of aluminum for sale ( they are just blocks of metal) , so are jigs that make this an easy process that can be done with tools purchased at a local hardware store ( drill press, router and drill bits)
Click to expand...
Yeah… Machining is not “an easy process”. A proper TIGHT lathe and press will set you back two grand for a crappy one and the jigs and bits for working them ARE NOT available at “your local hardware store” unless you live in an area chock-full of machinists.

If you don’t really know what you’re doing, you’re going to end up with a block of aluminum that will be deadly… if you can throw that hard.

The common person isn’t going to go through all the training and capital investment. Someone contemplating a violent act won’t either unless they’ve been thinking about it for a really, really long time. Which eliminates most folks who perpetuate gun-crime.
 
Last edited:
Those same people are also encourage a mass invasion of 3rd world nonwhites while hawking the myth of white privilege. We live in very interesting times my friend.
 
phil19034 said:
The only thing I think taking guns away will do is take them away from the
good people, while the bad people still have them. Criminals buy guns
often times, illegally. Not all the time (like this crazy guy), but a lot
of times.
Click to expand...
That’s true. Which is why we need a buy-back program. Criminals are typically poor and poor people eventually need the money. It’ll take time, but it’ll start sucking guns off the street.
Take guns away from gangs, they will go back to using knives. Gang members
can do some pretty horrible things with knives.
Click to expand...
there’s some truth there. But what’s also true is that when you make crime harder to perpetrate, crime goes down. We have oceans of data in support of this.
One suggestion I have, which often shot down by both sides is allowing
local (not state) referendums to beta test gun controls/laws on a local
level. But both sides reject it right away.
Click to expand...
Sounds reasonable to me.
The only way to really solve this problem is to fix the family and stop
having deadbeat dad’s, but Democrats continue with their support of the
selfish me, me, me culture
Click to expand...
Trust me, that ain’t just a “democrat” issue. It’s a human one. Repubs aren’t any less selfish than dems.
 
starshiptrooper said:
Nice to hear you admit that Trump is competent. To be fair, a rebellion of the degenerates and third world invaders mustered by the Left would be trounced thoroughly and easily.
Click to expand...
Actually I have never doubted DJT’s temperament to push a button in the middle of the night to start WWIII and blow up the human race. Of course he would tweet about it by 4 a.m.
 
Duesenberg said:
Are you kidding? The 2A is already highly restricted – especially here in California with ridiculous laws.
Click to expand...
No I’m dead serious. For gun worshipers heaven forbid we ban any weaponry at all. But people get all up in arms about a flag or kneeling during a song and neither of those have the capacity to mass murder.
 
Disgusting and reported. Are you seriously threatening of encouraging violence? What do you mean by “quelling.”
 
I mean putting an end to disorder or rebellion by the use of force. Just like you call for the use of force against gun-owners. The only difference is that in my case, the state is responding to violence instead of initiating it.
 
Same thing that would happen to you guys if the police came and asked you to hand over contraband.

What would your response be? Remembering police get a bit toey if people don’t comply.
 
So it is not voluntary, but done under threat.

I would respond the same way the founders of my country did at Lexington and Concord on April 19th, 1775 and be worthy of their glorious legacy.
 
Last edited:
I think you are conflating two things.
  1. We discussed the VOLUNTARY gun amnesty. No threats at all.
  2. Having contraband like illegal weapons, people, drugs, stolen goods, flora, fauna, counterfeit Machines, illegal goods in general, etc .
Now if a cop comes knocking and asks a person to hand it over, what’s that person going to do?
Is the cop going to leave without the contraband, and most likely you, or do his job and secure both?

Are you going to risk getting shot or tasered or pepper sprayed because you want to resist or do a usain bolt?

What would you do in case# 2?

If you respond to not handing over illegal goods, and resisting, won’t you be arrested anyway and be charged with much more then I gram of ICE for example. And/Or be in need of medical attention because cops had to taser your arse.

That’s a bit Ned Kelly
 
Last edited:
I thought that the reference to Lexington and Concord answered your question.
 
There can be absolutely no beneficial debate if the extreme pro Gun side refuses to accept that at least some kind of reasonable gun regulation is needed. Period. There is this false argument repeated over and over that the Government is trying to take away your guns, this has been proven 100% false.

www.nytimes.com

A Senator’s Search for an Ally Keeps a Gun Bill Alive (Published 2013)

Two of the National Rifle Association’s favorites in the Senate came together in a last-ditch effort on a background check deal that opened the door for Congress to consider new gun laws.
www.nytimes.com www.nytimes.com
 
we learnt Australian History in school, not American. Maybe some English too. So you will have to explain the events and meaning in your references.
Our history lessons were whitewashed back then.

And give that meaning a modern narrative.
 
Last edited:
Really? You are going to throw fake news at me?

We simply don’t have gangs here in the great tradition of your American gangs.

It matters not what the media names something. Your own President began the fake news narrative.

Hells Angels Motorcycle club

Bandido Motorcycle club.

We exported your Motorcycle clubs. The one percenters.

Clubs, well organised
criminal clubs.

Can we get back to the topic of this thread.

A poll about the second amendment.

Start a new thread if you want to persist on this tack
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top