Here we go again. More circumventing the 2nd by the Admin

originally posted by: butcherguy

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: butcherguy

Not all felons completely lose their right to vote. Depending on the state in which they committed a crime, many will regain their right to vote once they have served their time or over a certain period.

Again, the two examples are not very comparable. You're continuing to conflate the issue.

Do you support citizens going in to multiple precincts on election day and voting multiple times?
Since you have already stated that you do not support ID requirement for voting I will take that answer to mean , YES, you do support people voting in multiple precincts.

Of course I don't support people voting in multiple precincts, but, as I stated before, there is a big difference here.

Voter fraud is statistically rare. It is not worth the time or money to burden the entire system with new requirements and taxes to stop something that rarely happens. On top of that, no one is being hurt.

On the other hand, gun violence and crime occurs much more frequently and real people are hurt and/or killed. As a responsible gun owner and 2nd amendment advocate, I recognize that the biggest threat to my right to bear arms is not jeopardized by a few regulations to keep firearms out of the hands of certain individuals, but by those individuals themselves that will use a firearm to commit crime or possibly kill someone.

Trying to compare the two in any sort of form or fashion is asinine and no comparison can be made when it comes to it's effects on society as a whole.

In that case, we don't need to hear anything more from you about what laws are valid.

Well, that is quite rude and presumptuous. If you have to resort to that sort of debate tactic, it means that your point is either lost, or irrelevant to the matter at hand.

If you are going to approach an intelligent and respectful discussion like a high school teenage boy, then perhaps it is you that should not have a seat at the adult table when we take grown-up stuff.

a reply to: MrSpad

I would like to see required safety classes, back ground checks and gun owners held legally responsible for failing to safety handle or secure their weapons.

So you support the willful, wanting violation of Americans constitutional rights then.

www.legendsofamerica.com...

Amendment II 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.

Violation of the second.

Amendment IV The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Violation of the 4th.

Amendment V No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation

Violation of the 5th.

Amendment VI In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defense.

Violation of the 6th

Amendment VII In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.

Violation of the 7th.

Amendment IX The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people

Violation of the 9th.

Amendment X The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

Violation of the 10th.

Gun ownership has never been 'conditional'.

a reply to: MrSpad true, but an endless list of non or under enforced laws already on the books. Not all of us are irresponsible with our arms. Just enforce current laws.....

a reply to: ScientificRailgun

Did you just put bipolar and psychopath in the same category? Seriously? You are aware that not even all bipolars are considered equal. There are at least four different variants that span a spectrum of symptoms.

Just, well, wow.

a reply to: neo96

What about the rights of the victims? You KNOW there's going to be more soon. What about their rights?

a reply to: Hefficide

truest. post. EVER.

a reply to: Hefficide

A person like you, I'd have no problem owning the guns you want. From what you say, you have shown a history of NOT letting your problems get in the way of every day life. I'd venture to say, from this info, you may be MORE mentally stable than I.

You're right, you should not be lumped in with Dahlmer. Restricting gun ownership to mentally ill, or mentally unstable people should not be a blanket thing. It should be an if this then that situation. Same with people with a history of violence. Full disclosure, I think people with a history of violence, or who have been through the legal system way more than the average person should have more restrictions then people with a history of mental problems.

We should not paint everyone with the same brush, if so, I'd be looked at as the same as Klan members. Like another poster said, we need to have the medical professionals figure out who they would suggest should be given a second look. And hey, maybe it is let everyone have a gun, but we must protect citizens as a whole and at least make it a little more difficult if they have a recent history of problems. I mean, if I did a drive by as a kid, went to jail, got out, fully rehabed all that good stuff, shouldn't the process be a little bit more restrictive if I were to try to buy a gun. But also, if I've been out of jail for 10 years with no problems, that should be a clean slate.

to macman, you're right, you never said you were an adult, but this is an adult conversation. I also never said mental illness equals violent person. If how I put things made it seem that was that was in error.

But look, the government does have a duty to help protect citizens. Doing their best to make sure guns stay out of the hands of certain people is part of this, but there must very clear parameters.

I understand the opposition to my opinion, I just don't agree with it. That's fine it's why we are here on ATS.

originally posted by: Hefficide
a reply to: ScientificRailgun

Did you just put bipolar and psychopath in the same category? Seriously? You are aware that not even all bipolars are considered equal. There are at least four different variants that span a spectrum of symptoms.

Just, well, wow.

Perfect example of why a law like this DOESNT need to be enacted.......

originally posted by: intrepid
a reply to: neo96

What about the rights of the victims? You KNOW there's going to be more soon. What about their rights?

What about them ?

80 years of gun regulations, and the regulation that make places like schools 'gun free'.

Dunno why people are getting shot today.

After all we have hundreds of laws that say people can't do that.

originally posted by: Hefficide
a reply to: ScientificRailgun

Did you just put bipolar and psychopath in the same category? Seriously? You are aware that not even all bipolars are considered equal. There are at least four different variants that span a spectrum of symptoms.

Just, well, wow.

I was speaking broadly. There are also multiple types of Psychopathy. I know not all mental diseases are the same, but in the interest of keeping the question simple, I simplified the illness.

I suffer from a serious sleep disorder myself, and most people just broadly paint me as an "insomniac" when that couldn't be further from the truth. I know how it feels to be pigeonholed, and I wasn't trying to do that here, but rather ask a simple question.

originally posted by: neo96

originally posted by: intrepid
a reply to: neo96

What about the rights of the victims? You KNOW there's going to be more soon. What about their rights?

What about them ?

Exactly. They don't matter.

a reply to: intrepid

You do realize that Defensive Gun Use also prevent at least 100k crime every year (according to the National Crime Victimization Survey).

a reply to: introvert

Voter fraud is statistically rare.

It is rare because it isn't reported. It is a victimless crime, so to speak.
I know people that went to vote and a vote had already been cast in their name. Did they report it? No, because they said it didn't matter to them because the precinct left them go ahead an vote anyway. Anecdotal, sure it is... but what else is there in the case of voter fraud???

originally posted by: ScientificRailgun
I was speaking broadly. There are also multiple types of Psychopathy. I know not all mental diseases are the same, but in the interest of keeping the question simple, I simplified the illness.

If you make this mistake of painting with a broad brush, do you think the government will do any better?

a reply to: butcherguy

Ok, so how can you logically compare voter fraud to gun crimes in order to makes some point about regulation or laws?

What is your point?

originally posted by: joemoe
a reply to: intrepid

You do realize that Defensive Gun Use also prevent at least 100k crime every year (according to the National Crime Victimization Survey).

What does that mean to the victims and their families?

a reply to: intrepid

you ever heard of kennesaw, ga? not trying to be a di*k, just asking. i think they protect the victims quite well.

originally posted by: joemoe

originally posted by: ScientificRailgun
I was speaking broadly. There are also multiple types of Psychopathy. I know not all mental diseases are the same, but in the interest of keeping the question simple, I simplified the illness.

If you make this mistake of painting with a broad brush, do you think the government will do any better?

Again, it wasn't a mistake, it was deliberate in the interest of asking a QUESTION.

You know, debating in hypotheticals, as we are often to do here.

originally posted by: joemoe

originally posted by: ScientificRailgun
I was speaking broadly. There are also multiple types of Psychopathy. I know not all mental diseases are the same, but in the interest of keeping the question simple, I simplified the illness.

If you make this mistake of painting with a broad brush, do you think the government will do any better?

That is why most of us are saying that we would want to see how these regulations are written before we support it. We're not flying blind here. We recognize the opportunity for government over-reach, but we're not opposed to regulations that keep guns out of the hands of people that shouldn't have them.

a reply to: introvert

This pretty much sums up my stance. Let's see how the law is written THEN react. Overreach is very possible, but until it happens, it hasn't happened. We must stay diligent about this law.

I don't see whats wrong with this stance.