Banning certain types of guns =/= taking your rights away.
Quote from: Priscilla on December 19, 2014, 09:58:39 PMBanning certain types of guns =/= taking your rights away.It does thoughFor one, the 2A protects against a tyrannical government. How do you expect civilians to fight against terror with 9mm handguns?Secondly, give an inch and a mile will be taken. Slowly the government will ban certain weapons until there is a total ban
Quote from: Kinder der Mörder on December 19, 2014, 10:01:01 PMQuote from: Priscilla on December 19, 2014, 09:58:39 PMBanning certain types of guns =/= taking your rights away.It does thoughFor one, the 2A protects against a tyrannical government. How do you expect civilians to fight against terror with 9mm handguns?Secondly, give an inch and a mile will be taken. Slowly the government will ban certain weapons until there is a total ban The 2A was written centuries ago and is outdated. Civilians should not have a right to own assault rifles ad the like.
Quote from: Priscilla on December 19, 2014, 10:03:28 PMQuote from: Kinder der Mörder on December 19, 2014, 10:01:01 PMQuote from: Priscilla on December 19, 2014, 09:58:39 PMBanning certain types of guns =/= taking your rights away.It does thoughFor one, the 2A protects against a tyrannical government. How do you expect civilians to fight against terror with 9mm handguns?Secondly, give an inch and a mile will be taken. Slowly the government will ban certain weapons until there is a total ban The 2A was written centuries ago and is outdated. Civilians should not have a right to own assault rifles ad the like.Lol is that the only excuse you can come up with? Can you even give legit reasons to your claims aside from "muh age"?Tell the Jews in Nazi Germany that gun ownership was outdated, because it was gun control against them that led to the Holocaust. But if you're going to bring up age, then the Magna Carta should be abolished and let the monarchy have unlimited powerDo you even know what an assault rifle is anyway? Because an AR-15 is not one
Quote from: Kinder der Mörder on December 19, 2014, 10:06:09 PMQuote from: Priscilla on December 19, 2014, 10:03:28 PMQuote from: Kinder der Mörder on December 19, 2014, 10:01:01 PMQuote from: Priscilla on December 19, 2014, 09:58:39 PMBanning certain types of guns =/= taking your rights away.It does thoughFor one, the 2A protects against a tyrannical government. How do you expect civilians to fight against terror with 9mm handguns?Secondly, give an inch and a mile will be taken. Slowly the government will ban certain weapons until there is a total ban The 2A was written centuries ago and is outdated. Civilians should not have a right to own assault rifles ad the like.Lol is that the only excuse you can come up with? Can you even give legit reasons to your claims aside from "muh age"?Tell the Jews in Nazi Germany that gun ownership was outdated, because it was gun control against them that led to the Holocaust. But if you're going to bring up age, then the Magna Carta should be abolished and let the monarchy have unlimited powerDo you even know what an assault rifle is anyway? Because an AR-15 is not one Even if the jews had guns they still would have been rounded up. So that argument is pointless.
Quote from: Priscilla on December 19, 2014, 10:08:29 PMQuote from: Kinder der Mörder on December 19, 2014, 10:06:09 PMQuote from: Priscilla on December 19, 2014, 10:03:28 PMQuote from: Kinder der Mörder on December 19, 2014, 10:01:01 PMQuote from: Priscilla on December 19, 2014, 09:58:39 PMBanning certain types of guns =/= taking your rights away.It does thoughFor one, the 2A protects against a tyrannical government. How do you expect civilians to fight against terror with 9mm handguns?Secondly, give an inch and a mile will be taken. Slowly the government will ban certain weapons until there is a total ban The 2A was written centuries ago and is outdated. Civilians should not have a right to own assault rifles ad the like.Lol is that the only excuse you can come up with? Can you even give legit reasons to your claims aside from "muh age"?Tell the Jews in Nazi Germany that gun ownership was outdated, because it was gun control against them that led to the Holocaust. But if you're going to bring up age, then the Magna Carta should be abolished and let the monarchy have unlimited powerDo you even know what an assault rifle is anyway? Because an AR-15 is not one Even if the jews had guns they still would have been rounded up. So that argument is pointless.And your proof is where?
Civilians should not have a right to own assault rifles ad the like.
Quote from: Kinder der Mörder on December 19, 2014, 10:10:59 PMQuote from: Priscilla on December 19, 2014, 10:08:29 PMQuote from: Kinder der Mörder on December 19, 2014, 10:06:09 PMQuote from: Priscilla on December 19, 2014, 10:03:28 PMQuote from: Kinder der Mörder on December 19, 2014, 10:01:01 PMQuote from: Priscilla on December 19, 2014, 09:58:39 PMBanning certain types of guns =/= taking your rights away.It does thoughFor one, the 2A protects against a tyrannical government. How do you expect civilians to fight against terror with 9mm handguns?Secondly, give an inch and a mile will be taken. Slowly the government will ban certain weapons until there is a total ban The 2A was written centuries ago and is outdated. Civilians should not have a right to own assault rifles ad the like.Lol is that the only excuse you can come up with? Can you even give legit reasons to your claims aside from "muh age"?Tell the Jews in Nazi Germany that gun ownership was outdated, because it was gun control against them that led to the Holocaust. But if you're going to bring up age, then the Magna Carta should be abolished and let the monarchy have unlimited powerDo you even know what an assault rifle is anyway? Because an AR-15 is not one Even if the jews had guns they still would have been rounded up. So that argument is pointless.And your proof is where?Do you have any proof that they still wouldn't have been rounded up?
Quote from: Saint Nick McIntyre on December 19, 2014, 10:14:54 PMQuote from: Kinder der Mörder on December 19, 2014, 10:10:59 PMQuote from: Priscilla on December 19, 2014, 10:08:29 PMQuote from: Kinder der Mörder on December 19, 2014, 10:06:09 PMQuote from: Priscilla on December 19, 2014, 10:03:28 PMQuote from: Kinder der Mörder on December 19, 2014, 10:01:01 PMQuote from: Priscilla on December 19, 2014, 09:58:39 PMBanning certain types of guns =/= taking your rights away.It does thoughFor one, the 2A protects against a tyrannical government. How do you expect civilians to fight against terror with 9mm handguns?Secondly, give an inch and a mile will be taken. Slowly the government will ban certain weapons until there is a total ban The 2A was written centuries ago and is outdated. Civilians should not have a right to own assault rifles ad the like.Lol is that the only excuse you can come up with? Can you even give legit reasons to your claims aside from "muh age"?Tell the Jews in Nazi Germany that gun ownership was outdated, because it was gun control against them that led to the Holocaust. But if you're going to bring up age, then the Magna Carta should be abolished and let the monarchy have unlimited powerDo you even know what an assault rifle is anyway? Because an AR-15 is not one Even if the jews had guns they still would have been rounded up. So that argument is pointless.And your proof is where?Do you have any proof that they still wouldn't have been rounded up?It's rather common sense that governments listen to force. Ever hear of something called the French Revolution? American Revolution? October Revolution?
Quote from: Kinder der Mörder on December 19, 2014, 10:18:33 PMQuote from: Saint Nick McIntyre on December 19, 2014, 10:14:54 PMQuote from: Kinder der Mörder on December 19, 2014, 10:10:59 PMQuote from: Priscilla on December 19, 2014, 10:08:29 PMQuote from: Kinder der Mörder on December 19, 2014, 10:06:09 PMQuote from: Priscilla on December 19, 2014, 10:03:28 PMQuote from: Kinder der Mörder on December 19, 2014, 10:01:01 PMQuote from: Priscilla on December 19, 2014, 09:58:39 PMBanning certain types of guns =/= taking your rights away.It does thoughFor one, the 2A protects against a tyrannical government. How do you expect civilians to fight against terror with 9mm handguns?Secondly, give an inch and a mile will be taken. Slowly the government will ban certain weapons until there is a total ban The 2A was written centuries ago and is outdated. Civilians should not have a right to own assault rifles ad the like.Lol is that the only excuse you can come up with? Can you even give legit reasons to your claims aside from "muh age"?Tell the Jews in Nazi Germany that gun ownership was outdated, because it was gun control against them that led to the Holocaust. But if you're going to bring up age, then the Magna Carta should be abolished and let the monarchy have unlimited powerDo you even know what an assault rifle is anyway? Because an AR-15 is not one Even if the jews had guns they still would have been rounded up. So that argument is pointless.And your proof is where?Do you have any proof that they still wouldn't have been rounded up?It's rather common sense that governments listen to force. Ever hear of something called the French Revolution? American Revolution? October Revolution?FUCKING LOL. You think Hitler gave a fucking shit about the filthy Jews? They were inferior, and he would laugh them off even if they were armed and tried to revolt. He just beat them to the punch before a prolonged fight could happen.
For one, the 2A protects against a tyrannical government. How do you expect civilians to fight against terror with 9mm handguns?
Quote from: Kinder der Mörder on December 19, 2014, 10:01:01 PMFor one, the 2A protects against a tyrannical government. How do you expect civilians to fight against terror with 9mm handguns?In studying the time and circumstance of the late 1700's, I believe the second amendment was more to protect America from foreign threats than governmental tyranny.
Quote from: DAS B00T x2 on December 19, 2014, 10:26:42 PMQuote from: Kinder der Mörder on December 19, 2014, 10:01:01 PMFor one, the 2A protects against a tyrannical government. How do you expect civilians to fight against terror with 9mm handguns?In studying the time and circumstance of the late 1700's, I believe the second amendment was more to protect America from foreign threats than governmental tyranny.I heavily disagree. Several framers are quoted mentioning the positives of combating tyranny. "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."Thomas Jefferson
Quote from: DAS B00T x2 on December 19, 2014, 10:26:42 PMQuote from: Kinder der Mörder on December 19, 2014, 10:01:01 PMFor one, the 2A protects against a tyrannical government. How do you expect civilians to fight against terror with 9mm handguns?In studying the time and circumstance of the late 1700's, I believe the second amendment was more to protect America from foreign threats than governmental tyranny.Well the British government was only foreign in the sense a sea separated it from America. They were still part of the British Empire and answered directly to the King and British government.
So I because Hitler was brought up I'd just like to point out that gun rights were greatly expanded under his regime.
Quote from: Kinder der Mörder on December 19, 2014, 10:35:36 PMQuote from: DAS B00T x2 on December 19, 2014, 10:26:42 PMQuote from: Kinder der Mörder on December 19, 2014, 10:01:01 PMFor one, the 2A protects against a tyrannical government. How do you expect civilians to fight against terror with 9mm handguns?In studying the time and circumstance of the late 1700's, I believe the second amendment was more to protect America from foreign threats than governmental tyranny.Well the British government was only foreign in the sense a sea separated it from America. They were still part of the British Empire and answered directly to the King and British government.Umm... the bill of rights was written in 1791, Kinder. We were far past being British colonies at the time.
Quote from: DAS B00T x2 on December 19, 2014, 10:38:27 PMQuote from: Kinder der Mörder on December 19, 2014, 10:35:36 PMQuote from: DAS B00T x2 on December 19, 2014, 10:26:42 PMQuote from: Kinder der Mörder on December 19, 2014, 10:01:01 PMFor one, the 2A protects against a tyrannical government. How do you expect civilians to fight against terror with 9mm handguns?In studying the time and circumstance of the late 1700's, I believe the second amendment was more to protect America from foreign threats than governmental tyranny.Well the British government was only foreign in the sense a sea separated it from America. They were still part of the British Empire and answered directly to the King and British government.Umm... the bill of rights was written in 1791, Kinder. We were far past being British colonies at the time.Yes, I know. BUT the Bill of Rights was written in response to British rule over the colonies
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
So because Hitler was brought up I'd just like to point out that gun rights were greatly expanded under his regime.Gun rights don't really correlate to any form of government. So don't attempt any if gun rights are [ x ] [ y ] will happen arguments.
Quote from: Kinder der Mörder on December 19, 2014, 10:40:03 PMQuote from: DAS B00T x2 on December 19, 2014, 10:38:27 PMQuote from: Kinder der Mörder on December 19, 2014, 10:35:36 PMQuote from: DAS B00T x2 on December 19, 2014, 10:26:42 PMQuote from: Kinder der Mörder on December 19, 2014, 10:01:01 PMFor one, the 2A protects against a tyrannical government. How do you expect civilians to fight against terror with 9mm handguns?In studying the time and circumstance of the late 1700's, I believe the second amendment was more to protect America from foreign threats than governmental tyranny.Well the British government was only foreign in the sense a sea separated it from America. They were still part of the British Empire and answered directly to the King and British government.Umm... the bill of rights was written in 1791, Kinder. We were far past being British colonies at the time.Yes, I know. BUT the Bill of Rights was written in response to British rule over the coloniesQuoteA well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.Note the notions of a militia defending the free state. Plenty of nations had larger standing armies than the new and inexperienced United States. What better way to bolster numbers and ensure a reserve against foreign threats than to arm the populace?
Quote from: LC on December 19, 2014, 10:35:53 PMSo I because Hitler was brought up I'd just like to point out that gun rights were greatly expanded under his regime.Except for JewsGun ownership under Hitler is anything but fair to say the least. The only thing improved was gun regulations only applied to handguns and completely deregulated the acquisition and transfer of rifles and shotguns, as the possession of ammunition included
SCOTUS also recently ruled that people don't have to be in militias in order to be gun owners and the 2A does state a two-prong description that guarantees not only militias, but ordinary people who don't want to be part of one
Quote from: DAS B00T x2 on December 19, 2014, 10:42:21 PMQuote from: Kinder der Mörder on December 19, 2014, 10:40:03 PMQuote from: DAS B00T x2 on December 19, 2014, 10:38:27 PMQuote from: Kinder der Mörder on December 19, 2014, 10:35:36 PMQuote from: DAS B00T x2 on December 19, 2014, 10:26:42 PMQuote from: Kinder der Mörder on December 19, 2014, 10:01:01 PMFor one, the 2A protects against a tyrannical government. How do you expect civilians to fight against terror with 9mm handguns?In studying the time and circumstance of the late 1700's, I believe the second amendment was more to protect America from foreign threats than governmental tyranny.Well the British government was only foreign in the sense a sea separated it from America. They were still part of the British Empire and answered directly to the King and British government.Umm... the bill of rights was written in 1791, Kinder. We were far past being British colonies at the time.Yes, I know. BUT the Bill of Rights was written in response to British rule over the coloniesQuoteA well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.Note the notions of a militia defending the free state. Plenty of nations had larger standing armies than the new and inexperienced United States. What better way to bolster numbers and ensure a reserve against foreign threats than to arm the populace?YouTube
Quote from: LC on December 19, 2014, 10:35:53 PMSo because Hitler was brought up I'd just like to point out that gun rights were greatly expanded under his regime.Gun rights don't really correlate to any form of government. So don't attempt any if gun rights are [ x ] [ y ] will happen arguments.I would argue that a government will have to be much more careful with domestic policy when the populace is armed. Kind of an equalizer. You piss us off enough, we go Lexington and Concord on you.
Quote from: Kinder der Mörder on December 19, 2014, 10:39:19 PMQuote from: LC on December 19, 2014, 10:35:53 PMSo I because Hitler was brought up I'd just like to point out that gun rights were greatly expanded under his regime.Except for JewsGun ownership under Hitler is anything but fair to say the least. The only thing improved was gun regulations only applied to handguns and completely deregulated the acquisition and transfer of rifles and shotguns, as the possession of ammunition includedThere were many in Germany who could have used their expanded gun rights to attempt a revolution. That never happened though and the fact remains that gun rights were greatly expanded under him. If you were part of the SS you got more rights than the average German, but the average German still benefitted greatly in the gun rights department.Guns for Jews wouldn't have changed the end result of the holocaust in all likelihood.Once again, gun rights play no part in determining what a government ends up being or doing. The people residing in the country/state/et cetera is what determined that.
Take THAT California and New York
