The 2nd Amendment

[xenophobe]

Quick, name the gun-control counterpart to the NRA!

Which one? There are dozens of them...

Brady Campaign to Reduce Gun Violence (formerly Handgun Control Incorporated)
Million Mom March
Violence Policy Center
Democratic National Committee lol

umm... now I gotta think.... There are a number of others, including 'fake' hunting groups, but I can't think of them off the top of my head....

And do you know, there is no 'large membership' group of anti-gunners? Million Mom March is hundreds of thousands...

Also, did you know:

The most vocal anti-gunners compromise of a small group of individuals backed by multi-national corporate sponsors and from billionaires like Soros?

Most of the pro-gun lobby is funded by private individuals in the USA?

That when Handgun Control, Inc was asked for records to prove 1,000,000 members like they advertised, they declined? NRA was willing to prove it had 3,000,000+ unique individual members...

[xenophobe]

I realize that I may have jumped in the deep end here, I have never really known anyone to change their minds on this topic!

That's not true. Many anti's are converted every day. All it takes is some reasonable thought, an introduction to shooting (women LOVE to shoot guns... even the anti-gun women who get a proper chance to shoot at the range end up becoming gun lovers)...

Hurricane Katrina, when the police weren't around, looters and robbers, as well as the police trying to confiscate guns, yet couldn't provide protection changed a LOT of people's opinions.... "what do you mean I have to wait xx days before I can get a gun... I need one to protect my property NOW!!!"...

LA Riots also changed a lot of people's opinions.

All it will take is another major disaster, people learn that there are bad people out there and the police can't always protect them... they'll learn that a gun isn't a bad thing, especially when you really need one.

[marcus]

This really just proves my point. I was just pointing out that these groups have low numbers of membership and not much in the way of money compared to the NRA, in spite of the fact that there has been a plurality or majority of people supporting stricter gun laws in the gallup poll I cited. Gun regulation people just aren't as serious as gun people, even though they outnumber them. I was really just pointing this out because somebody cited a conspiracy by the media and the government to take our guns away or something like that. I just don't see it, and I think it is a big stretch to call anything a conspiracy that has such wide support.
And as you have pointed out, gun laws are getting much less strict, as opposed to stricter.


By the way, I know you were joking about the DNC, but as I have pointed out, the Democratic leadership has largely given up on gun control. Harry Reid has said that there will be no new gun control laws in response to what happened at VT, John Kerry made an obvious and laughable attempt to court the pro-gun crowd in the 2004 election with no such nod to the gun conrollers, no new gun legislation in 13 years, etc. Bush has even said he would sign the assault weapons ban if presented to him by congress. No such bill has been offered even though it has come up for a vote several times. Maybe you should point the fingers at the Republicans? Why didn't they remove any restrictions on guns in the 6 years they had control over every branch of federal government?


Although the cynical side of me says that the Republicans have taken care of "second amendment rights" for generations to come by packing the supreme court with conservatives. I have no doubt that if it comes up, they will find that the 14th amendment applies to the 2nd without any problems and that gun laws will have to change to accomodate this. I think this is funny because some of the conservatives on the court hate the 14th amendment and only seem to cite it when convenient.

As a final note, I realize I am new here, so I would like to say that I am not trying to pull anybodies chains. I am not an anti-gun crusader, but I believe it does disservice to the many citizens of this country who support reasonable gun control to say that there is some kind of conspiracy to take your guns away. We are still a democracy (actually a constitutional republic, but whatever) so like it or not, you have to deal with majority opinion, even if it runs contrary to yours. Please forgive a newbie!!!



I must say, I like you guys

Which one? There are dozens of them...

Brady Campaign to Reduce Gun Violence (formerly Handgun Control Incorporated)
Million Mom March
Violence Policy Center
Democratic National Committee lol

umm... now I gotta think.... There are a number of others, including 'fake' hunting groups, but I can't think of them off the top of my head....

And do you know, there is no 'large membership' group of anti-gunners? Million Mom March is hundreds of thousands...

Also, did you know:

The most vocal anti-gunners compromise of a small group of individuals backed by multi-national corporate sponsors and from billionaires like Soros?

Most of the pro-gun lobby is funded by private individuals in the USA?

That when Handgun Control, Inc was asked for records to prove 1,000,000 members like they advertised, they declined? NRA was willing to prove it had 3,000,000+ unique individual members...

[npacheco]

Apple meet Orange,my how different you two are.

I hope you are not comparing Nazi Germany to modern America.A tyrannical dictatorship hell bent on world domination and the destruction of races unlike its leader vs. a Republic of free thinking peoples who don't blindly follow everthing their government tells them?

Excuse me,but it's not the same,it's not even remotely close.

The quote I posted was a matter of fact,not a propaganda statement by a foreign leader with his own agenda.

Fact : In America,mass shootings have risen as guns have become more controlled and regulated.

The restrictions and bans and attempted controls have had no effect,and quite possibly the opposite effect.The more we ban and outlaw and attempt to control to give ourselves a sense of security,we are actually making the criminals themselves the ones who are much more safe as they are less likely to encounter resistance or someone defending themselves or their family.

Did I say that the two were the same? I'll have to re-read my post, but I'm pretty sure I never stated that. I'm not even sure I implied it. I merely posted a quote by someone who felt regulating gun ownership by citizens was a good idea.

That's it. Nothing more. Don't try to read anymore into it than that...I'm not that deep of a person.

As I also stated, I've never validated the quote myself. Someone sent it to me in an e-mail and I remembered it because of this discussion.

[AK47]

Screw the NRA they screwed alot of us gun owners by pushing there own political agenda...

All I can say if you can buy weed on the street than you can get yourself a real nice crappy gun illegally too...

One last thing the Korean kid was not a citizen of this country so how did he get his handguns I thought the right to bear was for citizens...

Just a few randow thoughts...

I like what the JFPO has done for gun owners recently...

[Spivonious]

Wow, this is probably the only thread I've ever started that approached 200 posts. On any board, ever.

I don't have anything new to add, I just wanted to say that it is very interesting and thought-provoking to read everyone's responses.

And welcome to the JCF Marcus!

[rjohnstone]

Uncle Ted has spoken.
God I love listening to him. He cracks me up, but he makes some very good points.

http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/04/19/commentary.nugent/index.html

Rock on Ted!

[Spivonious]

Uncle Ted has spoken.
God I love listening to him. He cracks me up, but he makes some very good points.

http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/04/19/commentary.nugent/index.html

Rock on Ted!

Just a correction for the linked article: the Amish school was out in the middle of farm country. There are no restrictions on guns there. The school itself was a one-room schoolhouse. Amish children typically don't bring guns to school.

I like this response to the editorial:

John Thatamanil, Nashville, Tennessee
"A God-given right to bear guns?" Dear Mr. Nugent, which God, pray tell, are you speaking about? Surely not Jesus, you know, the one who said, "He who lives by the sword dies by the sword." Frankly, I find Mr. Nugent whatever God he claims to worship terribly frightening. Stick to rock, Mr. Nugent, you are terrifically good at that!

[rjohnstone]

Like I said... Ted gets a bit worked up.
I like how the anti-gun folks chop up a statement and extract what they want to hear.

Ted actually said "People who refuse to accept the self-evident truth that free people have the God-given right to keep and bear arms, to defend themselves and their loved ones."

A little over dramatized by Ted, but that statement holds true to it's intent.

[Spivonious]

I just wanted to put that out there, since I live about 15 minutes from where it happened.

And the full quote of Ted still implies that God gave us the right to bear arms, which simply isn't true at all. This excerpt from the Bible proves that:

"But I tell you who hear me: Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you. If someone strikes you on one cheek, turn to him the other also. If someone takes your cloak, do not stop him from taking your tunic. Give to everyone who asks you, and if anyone takes what belongs to you, do not demand it back. Do to others as you would have them do to you.

[rjohnstone]

There's a difference between being robbed and being killed.
I have insurance... take what you want.
Threaten my life or my family and it's old testament time.
Eye for an eye.

And one could also flip the statement. "Do to others as you would have them do to you."
Far be it from me to defy the Bible. I will do unto the asshat as he is trying to do unto me.
See my point.

[lerxstcat]

Christians are not perfect in following the teachingts of Christ. This is often repeated in Scripture, which is why it's odd that non-Christians expect Christians to be perfect paragons. Especially when those non-Christians profess to not even believe, yet expect perfection from Christians.

I have no doubt that God will forgive my sin for killing a criminal who is trying to harm me and my family. He will understand that the motive was to protect innocents. I would never stand by and let the intruder harm my family just because of that verse. I would rather suffer the consequences of that "sin" if God does judge it a sin.

I just wanted to put that out there, since I live about 15 minutes from where it happened.

And the full quote of Ted still implies that God gave us the right to bear arms, which simply isn't true at all. This excerpt from the Bible proves that:

[xenophobe]

This really just proves my point. I was just pointing out that these groups have low numbers of membership and not much in the way of money compared to the NRA, in spite of the fact that there has been a plurality or majority of people supporting stricter gun laws in the gallup poll I cited.

You're misguided. NRA has a strong grassroots movement. MMM and Bradyites are funded by multinational corporations. If you hadn't noticed, the anti-gunners have all the money to spend on commercials and print media, while NRA achieves most of it's victories by focusing it's members to actually contact their representatives.

Despite having more money, the anti-gunners have been losing ground on gun control in the past decade, you should really look closely at the 'poll'.

The anti's just stomp their feet and yell loudly. They make their numbers look bigger by screaming louder. That is the way of the progressives.

Gun regulation people just aren't as serious as gun people, even though they outnumber them. I was really just pointing this out because somebody cited a conspiracy by the media and the government to take our guns away or something like that. I just don't see it, and I think it is a big stretch to call anything a conspiracy that has such wide support.
And as you have pointed out, gun laws are getting much less strict, as opposed to stricter.

The anti-gunners are losing because of their combined ultra-progressive agenda, along with many other factors. Hurricane Katrina showed a great number of people that being armed was necessary for survival.

By the way, I know you were joking about the DNC, but as I have pointed out, the Democratic leadership has largely given up on gun control. Harry Reid has said that there will be no new gun control laws in response to what happened at VT, John Kerry made an obvious and laughable attempt to court the pro-gun crowd in the 2004 election with no such nod to the gun conrollers, no new gun legislation in 13 years, etc.

A great deal of Democrats are pro-gun. A large number of them won't touch gun issues because it will piss off their constituencies. The Democratic leadership is not in touch with the traditional Democrats.

Bush has even said he would sign the assault weapons ban if presented to him by congress. No such bill has been offered even though it has come up for a vote several times. Maybe you should point the fingers at the Republicans? Why didn't they remove any restrictions on guns in the 6 years they had control over every branch of federal government?

I do point my fingers at Republicans. Bush has been no real friend of gun owners. Rudy Giuliani is anti-gun. So is Romney...

Although the cynical side of me says that the Republicans have taken care of "second amendment rights" for generations to come by packing the supreme court with conservatives. I have no doubt that if it comes up, they will find that the 14th amendment applies to the 2nd without any problems and that gun laws will have to change to accomodate this. I think this is funny because some of the conservatives on the court hate the 14th amendment and only seem to cite it when convenient.

2nd Amendment incorporation with the 14th was implied during it's drafting, though it's never been actively settled by SCOTUS. As a gun owner, yes I want this settled. The 2nd Amendment is clearly an individual right, and anyone who says otherwise ignores the complete historical background in which it was drafted.

The 14th Amendment was drafted by a Republican and was supported by the conservatives, and vehemently opposed by southern Democrats. And as much as it is touted as being created to establish and protect the rights of freed slaves, which the Civil Rights Act in 1866 actually did, the 14th was much more focused on protecting all rights of citizens in the various states from state abuse, which was happening regularly. Even Wikipedia's analysis of the 14th is wrong, because it doesn't differentiate the proposed 14th Amendment before and after the Citizenship Clause was added.

As a final note, I realize I am new here, so I would like to say that I am not trying to pull anybodies chains. I am not an anti-gun crusader, but I believe it does disservice to the many citizens of this country who support reasonable gun control to say that there is some kind of conspiracy to take your guns away. We are still a democracy (actually a constitutional republic, but whatever) so like it or not, you have to deal with majority opinion, even if it runs contrary to yours. Please forgive a newbie!!!

So you should also support a reasonable control on free speech. Like having to pass a test, background check or obtain license to be able to post an opinion publicly?

[VitaminG]

Hurricane Katrina showed a great number of people that being armed was necessary for survival.

that's a sorry indictment of the state of society in "the greatest country in the world", that anyone should feel the need to protect themselves to that level during a crisis in which you're already fighting so hard just to keep your family alive.

I appreciate that being disgusted by the behaviour of the looters, rapists & murderers who took advantage of others during such a time doesn't make the problem go away, and holding onto a big ol' shooter to discourage someone from fucking with your family would be a great deterent. But man, what ever happened to regular folks pulling together to get through a crisis like that?

Bush has been no real friend of gun owners.

I don't know.... if you want to play with guns, G Dubya has gone to a lot of trouble arranging somewhere for you to play with a whole arsenal of military grade weapons

So you should also support a reasonable control on free speech. Like having to pass a test, background check or obtain license to be able to post an opinion publicly?

holding your free speech up to someone's head and pulling the trigger isn't going to spatter their brains across the wall. They will make you jump through some hoops for a driver's licence though, so if your eye-sight, epilepsy or mental acuity makes you a hazard on the roads, they can decide to NOT grant you a licence before you plough your car through a crowded shopping mall.

[xenophobe]

that's a sorry indictment of the state of society in "the greatest country in the world", that anyone should feel the need to protect themselves to that level during a crisis in which you're already fighting so hard just to keep your family alive.

I appreciate that being disgusted by the behaviour of the looters, rapists & murderers who took advantage of others during such a time doesn't make the problem go away, and holding onto a big ol' shooter to discourage someone from fucking with your family would be a great deterent. But man, what ever happened to regular folks pulling together to get through a crisis like that?

Um... ok. When the LA Riots happened, what happened to the police? They hid in their police stations... one of them located in the Foothills was attacked by the low rent neighborhood, to the point they had to park a school bus in front of the place, sandbag and man posts with National Guard.

The average citizen, if he called the police during those 3 or 4 days, would have been told "sorry, can't help you". So if the police can't help you, and you're in trouble, what do you do?

Some lucky store owners in that area WERE armed, and guess what? Their stores were not the ones that were looted and burned down.

And gee, you guys are starting to have your problems too. Imagine if the Cronulla riots turned into the Sydney Riots? If the ethnic immigrants start a riot in major cities, you'll see that you're also not protected by any police. What happens when the Lebanese Wogs start attacking Bogans more often?

Betcha love those Abbos? Oh, and don't get me started about the Australian Aboriginal crime against white Australians.

Yeah, you'll want to shut the fuck up, because I know the BS that's going on over there that you'll want to pretend doesn't happen.

I don't know.... if you want to play with guns, G Dubya has gone to a lot of trouble arranging somewhere for you to play with a whole arsenal of military grade weapons

Okay, you should be more worried about what freedoms are given to you because dictating what my freedoms should and shouldn't be while pretending Australia doesn't have a host of problems it's going to be facing makes you look like a stereotypical yabbo. :p

Anyways, go sing your anthem, which oddly has always been as a subject of the UK empire.. well until recently... then you guys just changed the words.

holding your free speech up to someone's head and pulling the trigger isn't going to spatter their brains across the wall. They will make you jump through some hoops for a driver's licence though, so if your eye-sight, epilepsy or mental acuity makes you a hazard on the roads, they can decide to NOT grant you a licence before you plough your car through a crowded shopping mall.

What? To buy a car, you do not need to pass a background check, nor is there a 'cooling off period' that you have to wait before you take delivery of it. A child molester (here and I suppose over there) can buy a windowless box van and leave with it the same day.

Oh, and look at some of the firearms I've owned for many years, they've never committed a crime and have never shot anyone.






You're not a free citizen, you're a subject of a monarchy that does not trust you any more than an adult would trust a child.