It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
A religious gathering isn't inherently a violent thing. A gun, by definition, is a deadly weapon. That's it's entire purpose, to kill things. Comparing something that was literally invented to kill with a group of people gathering to talk about their religion is like comparing apples to water bottles, it just doesn't make any sense.
originally posted by: narrator
originally posted by: Krakatoa
originally posted by: narrator
originally posted by: Krakatoa
originally posted by: narrator
originally posted by: Krakatoa
originally posted by: narrator
originally posted by: Graysen
originally posted by: narrator
They ruled on it based on an amendment to the constitution. Yes, that can theoretically change. So can the 2nd.
Wrong.
while the court's ruling can be changed by a later course, the 2nd amendment can only be changed by a constitutional convention...
Also, having to go through a more rigorous background check and waiting period isn't infringing your right at all. You can still get the gun.
Can you get the gun while the check is still pending? No. See, That's infringement.
The first point: So...it can be changed. What I said is accurate. I didn't say how, I just said that it could. And it can. How was I wrong in what I said?
The second point: But you can still get the gun, so no actual infringement, just inconvenience. If you can't wait a week or 2 for a gun, I'd say you're probably planning something nefarious with it. Otherwise, what's a couple weeks? You have to wait months to get a driver's license, and pass 2 tests to get it. Do you feel that infringes on your right to drive, or do you look at that as a common sense way to make sure people know how to drive? Because that's how I look at buying a gun. You should have to demonstrate that you're of sound mind and capable of using it properly before you get one.
Point of important clarification, you do not have a Constitutionally protected right to drive. So, that is a red herring example. How about we use choice of religious gathering instead. Do you need to get approval and a background check to go to your local area to worship the way you want?
No, oh, I guess there is a Constitutional right to do that....and it doesn't even specifically say "shall not be infringed" in the amendment either.
There is a biog difference in your choice of analogy and the truth.
Your example is a red herring too though. A religious gathering isn't a deadly weapon. It's just a group of people.
Ignore my comparison if you don't like it. But you honestly feel that making sure someone is capable of properly using a gun before they get it infringes on that person's rights? That's gun safety 101.
Religious gatherings and followers are responsible for MANY deaths throughout history. IMO, religion is just as deadly as a physical weapon. More so in many ways, so it is relevant
It might be relevant in your head, but it's ridiculous to compare a gun to a Mass. A crazy guy goes to church...nothing happens, he gets to eat a wafer and listen to horrible music. A crazy guy buys a gun without proper vetting...bad stuff happens.
I guess Jim Jones doesn't qualify, huh?
I guess the Japanese cult Aum Shinrikyo doesn't qualify, huh?
I guess A crazy Islamic Jihadi goes to worship, and decides to blow up a mall because he is told there that his god demands it doesn't qualify huh??
I guess the whole Spanish Inquisition doesn't qualify huh?
Should I continue, or have I made my point yet?
You're listing violent religious organizations. I understand your point, I just completely disagree with it.
A religious gathering isn't inherently a violent thing. A gun, by definition, is a deadly weapon. That's it's entire purpose, to kill things.
Comparing something that was literally invented to kill with a group of people gathering to talk about their religion is like comparing apples to water bottles, it just doesn't make any sense.
originally posted by: Krakatoa
originally posted by: narrator
originally posted by: Krakatoa
originally posted by: narrator
originally posted by: Krakatoa
originally posted by: narrator
originally posted by: Krakatoa
originally posted by: narrator
originally posted by: Graysen
originally posted by: narrator
They ruled on it based on an amendment to the constitution. Yes, that can theoretically change. So can the 2nd.
Wrong.
while the court's ruling can be changed by a later course, the 2nd amendment can only be changed by a constitutional convention...
Also, having to go through a more rigorous background check and waiting period isn't infringing your right at all. You can still get the gun.
Can you get the gun while the check is still pending? No. See, That's infringement.
The first point: So...it can be changed. What I said is accurate. I didn't say how, I just said that it could. And it can. How was I wrong in what I said?
The second point: But you can still get the gun, so no actual infringement, just inconvenience. If you can't wait a week or 2 for a gun, I'd say you're probably planning something nefarious with it. Otherwise, what's a couple weeks? You have to wait months to get a driver's license, and pass 2 tests to get it. Do you feel that infringes on your right to drive, or do you look at that as a common sense way to make sure people know how to drive? Because that's how I look at buying a gun. You should have to demonstrate that you're of sound mind and capable of using it properly before you get one.
Point of important clarification, you do not have a Constitutionally protected right to drive. So, that is a red herring example. How about we use choice of religious gathering instead. Do you need to get approval and a background check to go to your local area to worship the way you want?
No, oh, I guess there is a Constitutional right to do that....and it doesn't even specifically say "shall not be infringed" in the amendment either.
There is a biog difference in your choice of analogy and the truth.
Your example is a red herring too though. A religious gathering isn't a deadly weapon. It's just a group of people.
Ignore my comparison if you don't like it. But you honestly feel that making sure someone is capable of properly using a gun before they get it infringes on that person's rights? That's gun safety 101.
Religious gatherings and followers are responsible for MANY deaths throughout history. IMO, religion is just as deadly as a physical weapon. More so in many ways, so it is relevant
It might be relevant in your head, but it's ridiculous to compare a gun to a Mass. A crazy guy goes to church...nothing happens, he gets to eat a wafer and listen to horrible music. A crazy guy buys a gun without proper vetting...bad stuff happens.
I guess Jim Jones doesn't qualify, huh?
I guess the Japanese cult Aum Shinrikyo doesn't qualify, huh?
I guess A crazy Islamic Jihadi goes to worship, and decides to blow up a mall because he is told there that his god demands it doesn't qualify huh??
I guess the whole Spanish Inquisition doesn't qualify huh?
Should I continue, or have I made my point yet?
You're listing violent religious organizations. I understand your point, I just completely disagree with it.
A religious gathering isn't inherently a violent thing. A gun, by definition, is a deadly weapon. That's it's entire purpose, to kill things.
Comparing something that was literally invented to kill with a group of people gathering to talk about their religion is like comparing apples to water bottles, it just doesn't make any sense.
I beg to differ. Religion. from its early inceptions, was also meant to kill. It. by definition, creates a separation of "us" vs. "them". The believers and the non-believers. That is the first step toward dehumanizing those that do not believe.
A gun is a tool, period. A gun isn't inherently a violent thing. And gun owners are not all killers either. It can be used for both purposes, good and bad, based upon the intent behind the person wielding it. Just as religion can be used for good or evil intent.
I get it, you hate guns. That is your decision, and right to make that for yourself. However, do not attempt to evangelize that same thing upon others when it is a protected right. I say the same thing for religion as well (another similarity, imagine that).
In fact, statistically, and historically, you are more likely to be killed by a religious fanatic than a gun.
originally posted by: TheElectricPriest
a reply to: Krakatoa
A religious gathering isn't inherently a violent thing. A gun, by definition, is a deadly weapon. That's it's entire purpose, to kill things. Comparing something that was literally invented to kill with a group of people gathering to talk about their religion is like comparing apples to water bottles, it just doesn't make any sense.
Oh please please please go get him! I would do it myself but I don't wanna! Guns do other things other than just kill, right? Or are clay pigeons life now?
originally posted by: JBurns
How long til patriotic citizens start enacting retribution for these senseless acts of genocide and mass murder?
How will our elected "officials" respond? Can we starve the enemy out, by targeting their welfare their environment and their healthcare? Or will something more..... direct .... be required?
The lives of these unborn Americans are worth far more than the mothers who would abort them. Abortionists are merely vessels for an unborn American, to be discarded after the birth is complete. Lock them up in a hospital and force the birth if needed.
This is war. The MILLIONS dying demand it.
originally posted by: ParasuvO
originally posted by: JBurns
How long til patriotic citizens start enacting retribution for these senseless acts of genocide and mass murder?
How will our elected "officials" respond? Can we starve the enemy out, by targeting their welfare their environment and their healthcare? Or will something more..... direct .... be required?
The lives of these unborn Americans are worth far more than the mothers who would abort them. Abortionists are merely vessels for an unborn American, to be discarded after the birth is complete. Lock them up in a hospital and force the birth if needed.
This is war. The MILLIONS dying demand it.
Indeed it feels the time is ripe all across the board regarding scum telling us how to live our lives...telling us how to think and subjecting us to de-evolution.
The Ones who lead these causes are my primary concern..and the Ones who control them.
They are dangerously close to Igniting a War that will see them exterminated 100%...and with Extreme Prejudice.
originally posted by: narrator
originally posted by: TheElectricPriest
a reply to: Krakatoa
A religious gathering isn't inherently a violent thing. A gun, by definition, is a deadly weapon. That's it's entire purpose, to kill things. Comparing something that was literally invented to kill with a group of people gathering to talk about their religion is like comparing apples to water bottles, it just doesn't make any sense.
Oh please please please go get him! I would do it myself but I don't wanna! Guns do other things other than just kill, right? Or are clay pigeons life now?
You seem like a real gem. Very priestly.
So, the original reasoning for inventing a gun was to shoot clay pigeons?
originally posted by: JBurns
originally posted by: DBCowboy
The ultimate irony is that bombing an abortion clinic is murder.
But what goes on inside isn't.
I salute every last person who has done that. They may have broken the law, but they did the objectively right thing.
Abortionists are sick, twisted and real low life # stains.
yep, that about covers it.
originally posted by: Ahabstar
Let me see if I got this straight, the same people in favor of killing a child up to and including the moment of birth want to ban guns because someone might get hurt or killed and yet also have no problem letting people enter the country that might want to hurt or kill others.
originally posted by: TheElectricPriest
originally posted by: narrator
originally posted by: TheElectricPriest
a reply to: Krakatoa
A religious gathering isn't inherently a violent thing. A gun, by definition, is a deadly weapon. That's it's entire purpose, to kill things. Comparing something that was literally invented to kill with a group of people gathering to talk about their religion is like comparing apples to water bottles, it just doesn't make any sense.
Oh please please please go get him! I would do it myself but I don't wanna! Guns do other things other than just kill, right? Or are clay pigeons life now?
You seem like a real gem. Very priestly.
So, the original reasoning for inventing a gun was to shoot clay pigeons?
Oh, just seeing how long it took to trigger you. Not too quickly, congrats. No, a gun kills, there's no doubt. You'd be surprised to hear, possibly, that I'm actually for gun restriction. I actually read the 2nd Amendment in it's entirety and feel that we're ignoring a major part of it, you know, that whole well regulated militia thing. Do I think gang bangers should own guns...nope. Loonies...nope. Fanatics...depends upon their fanaticism I suppose. Point being, I think that membership in an inactive yet well regulated militia, the words used in the actual 2nd Amendment would be the line of responsibility that need be met in order to have the right of ownership of something so clearly powerful and destructive. I've never understood why this has been so completely ignored.
Probably surprised to find we agree (somewhat) upon this, huh? But you're still a jerk...
originally posted by: ParasuvO
originally posted by: JBurns
How long til patriotic citizens start enacting retribution for these senseless acts of genocide and mass murder?
How will our elected "officials" respond? Can we starve the enemy out, by targeting their welfare their environment and their healthcare? Or will something more..... direct .... be required?
The lives of these unborn Americans are worth far more than the mothers who would abort them. Abortionists are merely vessels for an unborn American, to be discarded after the birth is complete. Lock them up in a hospital and force the birth if needed.
This is war. The MILLIONS dying demand it.
Indeed it feels the time is ripe all across the board regarding scum telling us how to live our lives...telling us how to think and subjecting us to de-evolution.
The Ones who lead these causes are my primary concern..and the Ones who control them.
They are dangerously close to Igniting a War that will see them exterminated 100%...and with Extreme Prejudice.
Wtf is with the recent push for baby killing!?
Last 3 weeks it’s been a different state.
It’s like the “caravan” of migrants but instead it’s dems and baby killers marching forward.
Disgusting.
originally posted by: strongfp
a reply to: TheElectricPriest
You're such a hypocrite. Sorry this thread was so exclusive that people cant state opinions mid way through. I think you dont understand how a forum works. Also you are assuming on my viewpoints on this subject. But since I'm such a hyper intellect you wont care either way. I'm to smart for you.
originally posted by: TheElectricPriest
a reply to: narrator
No...not trolling you, just looking at you from afar. By the way, you realize this is not a thread about gun control, right?
originally posted by: narrator
originally posted by: TheElectricPriest
a reply to: narrator
No...not trolling you, just looking at you from afar. By the way, you realize this is not a thread about gun control, right?
I do. The thread is about the constitutionality of a woman's right to abortion. I simply compared it to the constitutionality of something that a lot of ATS folks don't want touched in any way, shape, or form, but are A-ok with overturning the ruling that abortions are protected under the constitution of the US.