Why It Shouldn’t Matter If We Repeal The Second Amendment

a reply to: CornishCeltGuy

Hold on...my spidey senses are prickly...
Blonde?

I bet ya!

a reply to: CornishCeltGuy

on a scale of 1-10 is she a left swipe or a right swipe?

note that i dont know which way means hot

originally posted by: visitedbythem

originally posted by: TinySickTears
a reply to: visitedbythem

what do you hunt with that giant #ing monster in the back?

not asking to talk # im just curious

targets?

whales?

That's a Smith and Wesson 500. Its a 50 mag. Biggest production hand gun on the planet.
We hunt Bigfoot with it. Just kiddin.... Target practice, and home defence

Actually we do know where the Bigfoots are. Northern Cali, near Garberville. My friend had a close encounter last year. 20 feet away. He saw its face clearly. He was very scared, even though he was in his truck. He said it was very big and muscular, and could have rolled his truck over the cliff. so.... No joke. We would vaclock ity first, because they can smell guns, the gun oil.

originally posted by: TinySickTears
a reply to: CornishCeltGuy

on a scale of 1-10 is she a left swipe or a right swipe?

note that i dont know which way means hot

Ooh, I'm not sure if left or right is hot, never used that app.

originally posted by: TNMockingbird
a reply to: CornishCeltGuy

Hold on...my spidey senses are prickly...
Blonde?

I bet ya!

Haha yes obvs!!! x

a reply to: visitedbythem
Honest? FFS??? that just seems mad as #.

originally posted by: TinySickTears
a reply to: visitedbythem

yeah thats a big boy for sure
50 mag is 50 cal?

the the desert eagle from lock stock but not semi auto?

Same thing.
The dessert eagle has smaller shells. This one, you have to hold with both hands, so it doesn't come back and hit you in the head. Its scary to shoot. 24" ball of flame at night

a reply to: CornishCeltGuy

OMG!!!!!

I AM psychic!!!!

amazing...JS

originally posted by: CornishCeltGuy
a reply to: visitedbythem
Honest? FFS??? that just seems mad as #.

Honest

a reply to: TNMockingbird
Love ya! x

originally posted by: CornishCeltGuy
a reply to: PraetorianAZ

I like the way you seem to be thinking, good OP, cheers, inspired some thinking in my head.

...only bit I don't buy is god given rights, I only recognise human rights, but obvs if god turned up at my house giving it the large omnipotent thing I'd change my tune!

Unless you're American...you've no clue..... Anyway it was to fight off the BRITS and THEIR GUNS in the late 1700's.. trying to make us bend. We did not. UK lost... Now you don't GET IT or our Constitution... Or Bill of Rights.

You won't get us too now either. The Constitution stands... Jealous over the pond now aren't we? Too bad... Call your police and their Billy clubs..... !!

a reply to: PraetorianAZ

Very inspiring.

Since the beginning of civilization the government/ruling class always suppressed the people to keep power. It is up to the people to decide how suppressed they want to be until it is to late and they are not allowed to decide.

originally posted by: mysterioustranger

originally posted by: CornishCeltGuy
a reply to: PraetorianAZ

I like the way you seem to be thinking, good OP, cheers, inspired some thinking in my head.

...only bit I don't buy is god given rights, I only recognise human rights, but obvs if god turned up at my house giving it the large omnipotent thing I'd change my tune!

Unless you're American...you've no clue..... Anyway it was to fight off the BRITS and THEIR GUNS in the late 1700's.. trying to make us bend. We did not. UK lost... Now you don't GET IT or our Constitution... Or Bill of Rights.

You won't get us too now either. The Constitution stands... Jealous over the pond now aren't we? Too bad... Call your police and their Billy clubs..... !!

Gosh you seem bitter and angry.
I totally get the history, and if I was alive back then I'd have been fighting the redcoats.
I'm jealous of # all to be honest, and I support the 2nd.

EDIT
And on the cop note, it is pretty cool to live in a country where when a cop is being a prick you can call him a prick and all he has is a lame extendable baton to be angry with. They have to be friendly here, even though it ain't the 'official' land of the free LMAO!


EDIT
The old truncheons were worse in my opinion, the skinny ass steel batons just sting a bit.

I wish liberals and antigunners everywhere understood that the Constitution of the United States does NOT confer rights. It acknowledges that the rights of people are pre-existing with regard to the constitution itself, and the language of the 1st ten amendments places no restriction on the person, but on government and what it may do.

originally posted by: neo96

Now we can sit here and argue that the second amendment was written with muskets in mind.

No you can't.

The musket was the pinnacle of technology of the era. The assault weapon of it's time.

You can't place limit on a firearm then turn around and use your smart phone to tweet or like something on facebook.

Yeah and people would stand there and shoot at each other, too.

originally posted by: visitedbythem

originally posted by: TinySickTears
a reply to: visitedbythem

yeah thats a big boy for sure
50 mag is 50 cal?

the the desert eagle from lock stock but not semi auto?

Same thing.
The dessert eagle has smaller shells. This one, you have to hold with both hands, so it doesn't come back and hit you in the head. Its scary to shoot. 24" ball of flame at night

Yeah not something you want unload rapid fire.

a reply to: PraetorianAZ

Ah , er, What ? BANG !

a reply to: burgerbuddy

I've only ever fired SA80's and shotguns, but I took an extendable baton off a cop once and threw it into someone's garden, he shat himself without his tool and his mates took the piss when they arrived as backup lol.

EDIT
Actually tell a lie, I practiced shooting first with .22 and .303 Lee Enfield rifles as a 12 year old sea cadet.
We do have access to firearms in the UK.

Interesting article, though there are a few things that could be stated with the current debate.

When this was written, the reality is that the founding fathers, nor many in the country, believe in having a large standing military. The founding fathers saw firsthand what the problems and abuses could be done by a country who had a standing military. They saw where many countries in Europe would be held under the thumb of a government, by the power of the military, which at the expense of the very rights that they held up, were often ignored or removed by the whims of the person who was in charge.

The 2nd amendment was written with the idea, that to defend the country, that it would not fall to the government to do, but to the very citizens who lived here. Back then, if there was a threat, people were called up and then they would bring their firearms, and report, with the government providing the ammunition for such. The war of 1812 showed that, were the USA went to war with Great Britain and the majority of the army was made from the local population, nonmilitary forces. It was not until World War I, that the US started to increase and keep a large standing military force.

The saddest part about this debate is that it has gotten to this point where it is too partisan and that neither side wants to admit that the other side has good ideas. And often in their attempt to justify that their side is right, one side or the other will start demonizing the other. Both sides in this are wrong and both sides have valid points that should be considered. And what is even worse is that lobbyist and money are involved and that makes this far more damming than it should be. This country was founded on a question so dangerous the mere mention could get one executed, and yet now here is a debate that is getting there.

The nature of this debate should be changed, and needs to. The first thing that no one tends to talk about is the limits of the 2nd amendment. Owning a firearm, that is fine, but what are the limits? No rights in the bill of rights are limitless, there are fine lines which define what is and is not protected.

Perhaps it would be prudent to discuss what are the limits, and not the regulations, on the 2nd amendment. There is a big difference between a limit and a regulation. The government can and does regulate weapons. Some they do ban a few weapons, but most are regulated depending on the weapon in one form or another.

Knowing that there are limits on all rights, the question is what are the limits on the 2nd amendment.

a reply to: sdcigarpig

Then lets discuss the limits on all our other rights first.

No other rights occasion so much need to curb them as this one, and when you start out discussing how the danger is in governments using large standing armies to oppress their citizens, you hit right on the reason there is so much anxiety about talk of government then turning and regulating what the citizens can and cannot have.

You do it in the very same breath!

Maybe the government should disarm or regulate what it can and cannot have to oppress us with before it tells us what we can and cannot have in order to defend ourselves from it?