Here is my problem with the 2nd amendment...

All of those pictures are less censored than curse words. And yet curse words cause no injury.

Stupidy has no excuse.

a reply to: boncho

Idiots exist everywhere but should we restict everyone's freedoms & rights because of them? May as take away cars & do away with licenses because they are plenty of idiots on the road.

a reply to: boncho


The 2nd Amendment still gives "We the People" a means to fight back tyranny. Three things you have to remember 1) Not everyone in the military/police will fight for a tyrannical government 2) There are many times more veterans at any given time in the population than there are active servicemen in the military (not all of then will be happy with a tyrannical government either) and 3) The odds of an outnumbered standing army winning a gorilla warfare is slim when the fighters can melt back into the population.

originally posted by: boncho

originally posted by: butcherguy
a reply to: boncho
Thankfully, the Constitution is not easy to change.

What would be the difference if it did?. That's the whole point of the thread. To claim the people have some spooky power over the government because they have pop-guns is nonsense. The government has armies, UAVs, microwave guns, laser beams... But forget the specifics, whatever gun you have they have a bigger one. And however many buddies you can round up for a suicide march they can get more in tactical gear.



Since the purpose of the 2nd amendment is moot, the meaning behind it is moot as well.

The two advantages to the populace being armed that serves the government well is that 1, it gives you all some mushy gushy feeling you are free and powerful on your land in your home country that belongs to you and your brethren with guns (when in reality you're a cog), and 2, it does make it very unappealing for foreign occupation so a ground invasion would not be high on an enemies' list of ways to conquer you.

It would be a gorilla war, hit and run. No battles. See Vietnam war.
Around every corner behind every bush

originally posted by: boncho
a reply to: MarlinGrace

When the SHTF just throw up your hands and give up, just get out of the way for those of us who would want to fight for our rights.

Don't you get it? You don't have any. You lost them long ago. Whatever you have now is the illusion of.

Actually the illusion is a bit higher than that, this is ALL a hologram.

Mind is the most powerful feature here.

85 men and their small army may believe its all been lost long ago, and rogue judges aid and support them BUT if the people do not even allow a thought like that to linger, but push back even in small ways daily. By seeing, envisioning, writing/speaking and entrenching in the hologram, and perhaps taking small steps beyond that by letting their elected minions know what they want and will support, it becomes quite a job for that small group of 85 men (mostly) to lay seige.

If they could just take power over everyone's minds and alter the realm into their global domination system, they'd have done this already In 3 generations the kids wouldn't believe grandpa anymore, when he tells them what they did.

Apparently, they can't. Because of something many really wrapped up in the material world around them don't get, and are always skeptical of, MIND/SPIRIT and that the ones at the top are dark gnostics, they're very spiritual, everything is done in their ancient religion. They're not free minds either.

What you just wrote is a perception, and I don't share it. What I see is attempts to lay seige to people's empowerment, and how risky it is to even make those attempts for them as they're playing with soul empowerment that is thousands of time superman's, maybe millions.

What you see, nourish and grow within yourself, your belief in freedom, goodness, love, for example, and what country you are living in, becomes you reality as you work at staying in a good loving place. The more you clear out the trauma and inertia, and blocks, the more you shine in what you do want.

From a Christian and gnostic Christian position (because its the only one I've studied in any depth) this means as Paul says, forming the Christ within you.

Ie Higher Mind.

No one's lost any freedoms. A small group of jeuvies is trying to intimidate people to make them think they have because they lay seige to people's minds. If they had real power over people, they'd have taken that long ago.

So its time to clear out the depressive thoughts and step into Higher Mind with others and problem solve.

the best solution, in my opinion, is this: an armed insurrection is a flight of fantasy and (if it occurs) would probably make things worse.

www.nationalreview.com...
hell; even what many of you would consider a "librul rag" says as much;
nymag.com...

-"anti-gun" advocates, stop being hysterical about rifles and crap, they're not really the problem. using the term "assault weapons" or regurgitating those tired arguments for gun-control is counterproductive, as it leaves you open to rigorous attack from your opponents, and in turn serves to fuel fire and distrust between factions.

-handguns are the problem, not "assault rifles"... Handguns are used more often in crime, (and in massacres) than rifles or shotguns. this is probably because the ammunition is cheaper, more compact (more bullets per weight and volume), the guns are often also more compact and easily concealed.

-and no this is not justification to ban all handguns, handguns have a use, for collector or protective (or both) value.

-I'm not exactly sure what should be done about handguns, but I think if anything should be done it should be done in light of the information above.

-for pro-gun advocates; please stop using that tired argument of "only criminals would have guns", its tired. Criminals get their guns from crooked dealers, or from stealing them from their owners, shrink the amount of handguns sold to the public, and you'll reduce the number of guns available to criminals, not instantly of course, but with time.

-usually when I use the argument above I get replies telling me how easy it is to reload ammunition, or how long handguns can last with proper care and maintenance, I don't think it's a very valid argument (in most cases anyway). It's like expecting a gangbanger/street criminal to take up smelting and casting/gunsmithing, it's too much effort when a knife would probably do in most cases..

-I think we need to permit greater civilian ownership of tasers and other "less-than lethal" weapons, and encourage their development as alternatives to firearms.

-oddly I'm okay with derringers or pocket pistols, at least some of them anyway, the main reason being that you have a smaller magazine capacity, (which makes them less likely to be used in a mass-shooting)

-in addition, the second-amendment (according to the interpretation of SCOTUS) protects the right to bear arms; but... what about sidearms

a reply to: boncho

A joke around the world, eh? Well, from my view, the joke is on them.

My 'simple' view is with freedoms comes abuse.

Freedom, in this example, is choice. The ability and political environment where one can exercise an option. Yes, the ill informed, the criminals and nuts also fall under that freedom. There is no escaping that "two edged sword" when dealing with freedom.

Second amendment or any freedom, for that matter.

The debate on both sides has a fear factor involved. Both sides. Fear of guns? Get rid of them. Fear of bad people with guns? Arm up! Just different 'solutions'.

You cite the 'granny" who shot the kid. A sad incident. Yet, if you research, you would find more kids drown in pools in the U.S. on an annual basis than are shot with guns.( Find it yourself, thank you. If you honestly want to inform yourself of all the facts, on both sides, then you will do so. Otherwise, you have already made your 'choice' and aren't interested in the other side of it)

Estimates range as high as 330 million rifles and hand guns in the hands of the civilian population. The exact numbers are debatable. The volume of them is not debatable.

It is a testament to the overall responsibility of gun owners that this sort of accident doesn't happen more often.

Yet, on the other hand, the almost daily occurrence of thwarted robberies is ignored by the mainstream media- often covered on Facebook with local media feeds of those events, therefore not fabricated, if you connect to the 'right' sites.

One is accorded the privilege of a drivers license. It is assumed you will drive responsibly. If you fail to do so, depending on local regulations, you will lose that privilege. I certainly don't want some idiot behind the wheel of a car dictating my driving privileges. I use that analogy to point out the similarities in the second.

Yes, the education level has crashed, as the responsibility level, etc.. Ironically, it's the same people who want the gun rights curtailed and, ultimately, removed that hold the most responsibility for the "changed" education system. Too funny.

Yes the U.S. is the home of more stupidity, more mistakes, more weirdness than anywhere else in the world. That's due to that freedom. That choice. THEIR choice.

The stallion is more admirable than the gelding.

If you choose to be 'gelded', fine with me. Try to geld me? I will exercise my freedom of choice..

a reply to: boncho

If you really want to see what having no rights is compared to right now today in the US. Just jump across the border and ask Sergeant Tahmooressi, and when you do don't talk crap, take a gun, and whatever you do don't protest for citizenship, you will get an extended stay at the same place.

You would think that she would have asked who was there before shooting. I would never shoot someone without seeing who I was shooting first. I don't go armed to the door if someone is knocking at night, but then again I don't live in the city either. If there is a chance of something I will carry a gun I suppose but I would only shoot if I need to. What happens if it is a cop at the door asking whether I have seen a missing neighbor kid or something? What if my daughter is coming home unexpectedly or my granddaughter is trying to come over?

Some people shouldn't have guns I guess. With gun ownership comes responsibility.

Recently, a senator revealed that she shoots with her eyes closed so she can be a better shot in the dark.
The golden rule broken by idiots who should not own a gun. The same thing applies here in this case; You never pull the trigger unless YOU KNOW EXACTLY WHAT YOU ARE SHOOTING AT! I was taught that when I was a little kid and have lived by it ever since!! What this idiot woman did is a disgrace to all legal gun owners. Sickening!!

Something don't smell right here, either. Nobody could be that afraid in their own home, and if they are, then they should seek professional advice.

Natural selection will always take its course, guns or not. If we weren't free to have firearms then people would just die in accidents while bashing themselves in the head with a lamp for a good selfie.

If you want to curb accidental gun deaths, then you need to combat the gun-shy culture of firearm ignorance. In the time of the Framers, proficiency with a gun stood between life and death. In an era of buying factory farmed pork and dialing 911 so you can wait over an hour to receive assistance, not so much. Ignorant people aren't going to educate themselves when they get a firearm.

originally posted by: Denoli
Glad I live in the uk with all the stupidity with guns ! I know it's the people pulling the trigger that's the problem, but if there's no trigger to pull then ! You know the rest !
Take a lesson from the uk

We did, over 200 years ago, that's why WE still have our guns.
I only have or need 3 "guns" a shotgun (for home protection), a hand gun (for personal protection) and a rifle (for hunting).
If you really want to see how effective the military is, just look at the rebels around the world running the military in circles.

a reply to: boncho

So, your problem is with some of the humans that own guns. I think you're misdiagnosing your problem, here--it's not the 2nd Amendment, it's those who exercise it (legally) without properly training for the tool it allows them to have.

I own many guns--some pistols, some rifles, some shotguns. I'm properly trained in concealed carry, safety, markmanship, and even how to disarm someone with one of the said weapons with my bare hands. I had to seek out that training because I'm responsible in owning a deadly weapon.

Those who choose to exercise their 2nd Amendment right, I salute you. Those who do it without proper training, I condemn your willful ignorance.

Those who complain about the 2nd Amendment and selectively find quotes that seem to (but don't) support your theory that it doesn't apply to individuals, I despise your ignorance as well. Choose not to own a firearm, but don't demonize those who do or diminish the true meaning of the 2nd Amendment in order to bastardize the freedom it allows.

a reply to: Bilk22

No, because this thread isn't about cars.

a reply to: MarlinGrace

The point was that the constitutional right was for a purpose. That is like saying you want to keep your freedom of speech after it has been chiseled down to posting letters to Department of Information, which, must review all submissions and once it meets certain criteria it will be disseminated to the populace.

And you are complaining because they decided they don't want to receive the letters anymore, yet you don't see that all the internet and free publications, all communication has been banned.