Amendment 2: - Right to Bear Arms DAMN RIGHT! Get over it!

Originally posted by chuckk
In Texas, you can shoot for almost any criminal reason (somebody broke into you neighbors house and you confronted them outside and shot them), this is okay

...there was an old fart in houston a few years ago that pulled that stunt and got real braggerty about it on his phone call to 911 prior to shooting the guys who were robbing the house next door... he sure was surprised when his rambo ass got arrested... must suck to be that stupid...

...this is how it really goes...

...your justifications for shooting someone (no matter how legit they sound) are not going to allow you to just go on about your biz... even if you catch someone inside of your house and shoot them, you're getting a free ride downtown...

...they may not charge you but you're gonna sit your happy ass down there for hours until someone makes the time to have a little chit-chat with you and, then, another and possibly a few more cuz thats what it takes before they can decide if your story is worth believing or not...

...i dont have a problem with that... some folks do but, hell, some people think their farts dont stink - go figure...

...of course there are exceptions to that standard - like, if yo daddy is a local judge that the cops on the scene happen to fear or respect - or - if you're a cop's wife - or - if you're a cop - or - if you're sleeping with half the force, lol... i'm joking (sorta kinda)...

...but seriously, chuck - do you know the only hard core rule in texas?... never EVER give credence to anyone in california thats tellin ya how things go in texas...

Do not rely on others to protect you, as their own protection comes first.

reply to post by SLAYER69


The confusing part is "arms" actually. What constitutes armament? Back in 1786, you had blades, bows, and muskets. Going into 2012, we have weapons capable of obliterating entire cities.

Where is the line, and why is the line? A weapon is a weapon, and apparently I have a right to own and bear weaponry.

If you're a constitutional literalist, you've gotta be all-or-nothing. I can't carry a tomahawk in public, and I can't own a tomahawk missile... why not?

reply to post by neo96


This is not entirely true, those are brandishing sentences.

Florida Statute 776.013 states that a person defending their home or occupied vehicle from an "unlawful" forceful entry or attempted forceful entry by another may use deadly force to stop the invasion or attempted invasion of the property.

Florida Statute 776.013

Most states have what is known as "Kings Castle Laws"

Looks like this was touched on already.

reply to post by neo96

Did he fire in to the ground or the air?
Was it on his own property?
If the answer is ground and his own property then he needed a better lawyer. If he wasn't on his property and shot in to the air I can understand this sentence.

I found this a good read on guns and their use in the US.

The National Self-Defense Survey indicated that there were 2.5 million incidents of defensive gun use per year in the U.S. during the 1988-1993 period. This is probably a conservative estimate, for two reasons. First, cases of respondents intentionally withholding reports of genuine defensive-gun uses were probably more common than cases of respondents reporting incidents that did not occur or that were not genuinely defensive. Second, the survey covered only adults age 18 and older, thereby excluding all defensive gun uses involving adolescents, the age group most likely to suffer a violent victimization. The authors concluded that defensive uses of guns are about three to four times as common as criminal uses of guns. The National Self-Defense Survey confirmed the picture of frequent defensive gun use implied by the results of earlier, less sophisticated surveys.

Guns and Self-Defense

reply to post by TheWalkingFox


I doubt they could fathom the type of weaponry we'd later come to develop.

I'm no history major, but I'd guess that back in those days it was more of a level playing field.

The only power we still have, is power in numbers.

Im with you man. The 2nd amendment is clear. it even goes as far as to say we should have private militias. Informed armed citizens aren't dangerous to anyone but would be tyrants and criminals

Originally posted by SLAYER69
Amendment 2: - Right to Bear Arms. Ratified 12/15/1791. Note 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.

OK, so whats so confusing here?

Wasn't this back when the US had no standing defence force so it was a good idea back then?

The police force was not invented until the early 19th Century either, another good reason.

Slavery was also thought an acceptable idea by the writers of the US constitution back then too.

damn straight, OP.

We live in a country where the Pizza guy is at your door before the police.

I carry with me all the time regardless of living in the ONLY REMAINING STATE that does not allow it: Illinois. It's only against their liberal laws if they catch me...and even then, oops legal loophole, it's in a waist pack, unloaded, with the mag in the next pocket.

I wish they'd just give it up and stop trying to control all of our lives. Really is quite pathetic.

Originally posted by PrimePorkchop
I carry with me all the time regardless of living in the ONLY REMAINING STATE that does not allow it: Illinois. It's only against their liberal laws if they catch me...and even then, oops legal loophole, it's in a waist pack, unloaded, with the mag in the next pocket.

That must be one dangerous place you live in Porkchop!!!

Have you ever needed to pull it?

reply to post by Krusty the Klown


Not yet.

I've never been in a car crash either...but I still put my seat belt on every time I drive, though.

Originally posted by Krusty the Klown

Originally posted by SLAYER69
Amendment 2: - Right to Bear Arms. Ratified 12/15/1791. Note 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.

OK, so whats so confusing here?

Slavery was also thought an acceptable idea by the writers of the US constitution back then too.

So what you've just said is exactly this:

"The founding fathers thought slavery was okay, so everything they've ever said or done is null and void"

You know what is hysterical? Slavery existed long before the original colonies or founding fathers did.

And if we were to go by your liberal interpretation of constitutional law, then all I can say is i'm glad you don't like freedom of speech or right to privacy, because im going to have a front row seat right in your living room when the government busts down your door and throws your butt in jail one day simply for belonging to a website that they don't care much for.

See? Thats the great thing about the constitution. I hate the fact that you are allowed to spew your "I want to control everything" hate speech, and you hate the fact that i'm allowed to carry a gun.

We either exist with each other and leave one another alone, or we both lose each "privilege" that we hold dearly.

I'll take mine over yours, however. Like they always say - Washington didn't win our country from the British by using his freedom of speech. He shot the bloody bastards and sent them packing back home.


People like you should make me sick. But i'd just spend all my free time puking.

Originally posted by PrimePorkchop
So what you've just said is exactly this:

"The founding fathers thought slavery was okay, so everything they've ever said or done is null and void"

No, just some of them.

You know what is hysterical? Slavery existed long before the original colonies or founding fathers did.

Yeah, and...........

And if we were to go by your mundane interpretation of constitutional law, then all I can say is i'm glad you don't like freedom of speech or right to privacy, because im going to have a front row seat when the government busts down your door and throws your butt in jail one day simply for belonging to a website that they don't care much for.

Lucky for me I live in another country then.

People like you should make me sick. But i'd just spend all my free time puking.

Jeez Porkchop, relax.

If you fire up this quickly I'm glad I'm not in your neighbourhood while you are carrying!!!

It's just a discussion that's all.........

reply to post by Krusty the Klown


well if you don't live here, then why do you stress out about it?

We either take all freedoms and coexist, or we have no freedoms and live under an oppressive government with no will to live.

You can have your free speech if I can have my guns. Thats why we wanted our own country to begin with.

Originally posted by PrimePorkchop
well if you don't live here, then why do you stress out about it?

Well, I didn't think I was actually stressing, just getting involved in a discussion that's all.

In response to some of you from page 2 who don't feel it necessary for Americans
to own guns. It's far too late to take their guns away, to do so would create
havoc mayhem and the like, almost over night. The black market for guns
would rise to an all time high, and would also create an immediate need for
a Police State. America is not China England or France, America is unique
as all Country's are. I honestly don't feel telling people from another country
how to live or run their private way of life any one's business particularily if
they have no idea what it's like. Live and Let Live.

Originally posted by ispyed

Originally posted by beezzer
When seconds count, the cops are only minutes away.
-Anon
You've been watching too many gangster movies!!

I could use the whole "cold dead hands" saying, but I hope people get the point. Our second ammendment rights should be kept as sacred as any of our other ammendments to the Constitution.

Sacred? Your sounding religious. The right to bear arms was surely for a time when you had no police force. It was a different world to the world we live in today when the ammendment was created. Abolishing or licensing gun ownership would be very difficult because of the pseudo religious attachment someamericans have for them. If not so many people died in the USA by the gun (20,000+ per anum) it wouldn't be such a big deal keeping guns.

So please get in the 21st century.

I'm going to keep this real simple. For every one person injured with a gun, fifteen lives are saved. More people die every year from accidental poisoining than accidental gun shots. Most of the people killed with guns are previously convicted criminals. Most of the people doing the killing are previously convicted criminals that can not legally own a firearm. In fact Milwaukee released a report showing that people committing "gun crime" have an average of 11 previous arrests.


Most of the time (up to 90%) using a gun in self defense does not involve shooting the gun. In most cases where a person uses a gun in self defense they are using it against a previously convicted criminal that is committing a felony. In 2000 it was estimated that guns prevented 550 rapes and 1,100 murders every day. That means that 1,100 people remained alive because they defended their life instead of begging for mercy while waiting for cops to show up.


To take it even further in studies released by the Department of Justice about 60% of criminals avoid targets they know are armed. 50% will avoid a target they believe to be armed. In other words the weapon itself is a deterent.

I'll go another route for you gun laws have been steadily loosened for about twenty years now. The crime rate has deen dropping the whole time. At the very least that proves that more guns and easier access doe not lead to an increase in crime.

Join the 21st century and realize that the only person responsible for saving your life is you. The police are not obligated to protect any single person. The police are obligated to do the best they can to protect the community.
I'll tell you what an honest cop told me. "We deter as many as we can with our presence. We stop a few if we're lucky. Then we try to solve the rest if we can. The others we don't worry about." What "others" was he talking about? He was talking about the crimes they can't solve. If they can't solve it then they don't worry about it. They have plenty of work to keep them busy.

Police are not emotionally invested in keeping you alive. Niether are they financially rewarded for doing so. You are the only person with a vested interest in keeping you safe. That is the ugly truth coming from a guy that works in a police department.

They do their job to the best of their ability on every shift. When that shift ends it all stays at headquarters. Other wise they turn in to emotional cripples. They either retire, destroy their personal life, or eat the gun. To avoid those nasty fates they learn to leave work at work. Your safety and your problems are work.

Gun ownership is not about a pseudo religous experience. It is about the self determination to provide for your own safety and protection in the gravest of extremes.

Originally posted by p00hbear
As a Brit member I'm intregued by the whole US gun bearing issue, I don't know anyone who own's a gun and my guess is that 99% of brits don't want to own firearms.

The questions i would like answered are:

When is it legal to fire a weapon with intent to kill?

Can you fire at someone for illegally entering a property?

Is there any control over the storage of guns and ammo?

p00hbear

When is it legal to fire a weapon with intent to kill?

The very simple answer is when it is reasonable to assume your life is in imminent danger you can use lethal force to protect yourself.

For example, you step outside your home to get the morning newspaper. You find a man, standing 15 feet from you holding a knife and making threats. If you were to shoot that man dead, you will go to jail. If that man however were coming at you and swinging the knife, and you shoot him dead, that is self defense. One thing to note is "self defense" laws do vary a bit from State to State.

Can you fire at someone for illegally entering a property?

This depends where you live in the United States. As an example, in the State of Massachusetts if a person breaks into your home, you are expected to flee your home if possible. If the burglar where to injure himself while robbing your home, you can be sued. In the State of Texas you have the right to shoot an intruder who is in your home weather they are armed themselves or not. So this question is something that really depends on where you live. Some States expect you to retreat while other States have what is known as "Castle Doctrines" and that you can not be expected to retreat once inside your Castle (home).

When it comes to shooting Intruders there is an old saying amongst gun owners. "I'd rather be judged by 12 than carried by 6". What this means is that to be "judged by 12" is to go to Court and be judged by a 12 man jury which is the standard amount of jurors for any Jury trial. "Carried by 6" is a reference to death. Usually there are 6 people, 3 on each side, who carry your coffin to and from the hearse. So what it means in essence is a person would rather kill another and go to jail, than to be killed themselves for not acting.


Is there any control over the storage of guns and ammo?

I am not completely sure I fully understand your question but I believe I have a general idea of what you are asking so I will try my best. If I have misunderstood your question, I apologize in advance.

Storing weapons and ammunition is usually regulated by State Laws and usually has various other circumstances that are taken into account. As an example, in some States if you have children you are to keep any and all firearms in a locked case, safe or cabinet so your children can not gain access. Below is a picture of what is known as a "Gun Safe".



Some States require you to use what is called a "trigger lock", which is a lock that surrounds the trigger of a firearm so that the trigger can not be pulled unless you remove the lock. Below is a picture of a typical trigger lock equipped onto a handgun.


My advice for anyone who has a desire to own a firearm is to look into your local area for classes pertaining to firearm safety. In my State the local Sheriff's office actually holds classes on firearm safety where they will teach you to shoot your weapon, clean your weapon, and how to properly store your weapons in accordance with State Laws.

reply to post by SLAYER69

Law abiding US Citizens have the lawful right to keep and bear firearms! This isn't brain surgery here or even rocket science! My outburst was over a recently read post/reply [which will remain anonymous] with regards to which thread but, their argument against legally held/owned firearms is PURE BS!

They may have been from another country. People get all hung up on the death statistics alone and don't really look at the big picture showing benefits of gun ownership.

I don't even see, since the Supreme Court determined it's civilians ARE what is meant by armed militia...(btw- then who are civilians?) the right to bear arms being threatened or questioned. I think stocking up on assault weapons is being discouraged but, other than that.... Sort of a non - starter but one that plays well to the tea drinkers.

The right to bear arms will be the last thing they take away from us.
Many more subtle and personal rights will go first while "they" have us preoccupied with this "hot button" one.