Gun Control!

What do you think about it?VoodooGamer

I dont really like it.

if more people are armed, the less crime well have. Criminals prey on the weak, and if everyone is armed nobody is weak. as far as im concerned, police officers arent quick enough, especially if you're gonna get murdered.

also, with people interested in doing some sort of massacre they would be at a severe disadvantage if all the people they wanted to kill were armed as well. Most people are good people, so the bad ones wouldnt stand a chance.

Founding fathers of USA made LEGAL to have a weapon to be sure that THE GOVERNMENT IS AFFRAID OF THE PEOPLE, not the other way around. DrCoCoPiMp

I agree, I especially dont like the idea that we have a government that comes from the top down, rather than the other way. We arent even self governing anymore. Theres the government, and then theres civilians. At one time, it was one in the same.

Founding fathers of USA made LEGAL to have a weapon to be sure that THE GOVERNMENT IS AFFRAID OF THE PEOPLE, not the other way around. DrCoCoPiMp

i thought it was bc there wasnt a military?

haha actually im listening to immortal technique right now...hollywood driveby.

I don't too much about gun control, I should do my homework on it but I just find it so boring. My personal stance on guns is there for the military not for everyday people but I know that would drive a lot of people insane hearing that. I wouldn't feel safe with a gun, if you want a weapon use a knife. Anyhow, I don't know look at Toronto it has 2.5 million people living there and less then 100 murders and 200 robberys. I wonder what there doing right.nirvana563

Use a knife? lol

Also San Francisco has less than 69 murders, and guns are allowed there. ;)

[QUOTE="DrCoCoPiMp"]Founding fathers of USA made LEGAL to have a weapon to be sure that THE GOVERNMENT IS AFFRAID OF THE PEOPLE, not the other way around. p2rus

i thought it was bc there wasnt a military?

haha actually im listening to immortal technique right now...hollywood driveby.

No, it is really to make sure that the people would keep control of their own country. Those were the dayz

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.

So it wasnt about a militia? i see something about the security of a free state.

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.

So it wasnt about a militia? i see something about the security of a free state.

p2rus

Same thing

[QUOTE="p2rus"]

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.

So it wasnt about a militia? i see something about the security of a free state.

DrCoCoPiMp

Same thing

militia = organized

everyone with gun = not organized

right?

Founding fathers of USA made LEGAL to have a weapon to be sure that THE GOVERNMENT IS AFFRAID OF THE PEOPLE, not the other way around. DrCoCoPiMp

and yet machine guns are outlawed...

[QUOTE="DrCoCoPiMp"]Founding fathers of USA made LEGAL to have a weapon to be sure that THE GOVERNMENT IS AFFRAID OF THE PEOPLE, not the other way around. Hewkii

and yet machine guns are outlawed...

if everyone had machine guns then yes bush would be very afraid.

[QUOTE="DrCoCoPiMp"][QUOTE="p2rus"]

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.

So it wasnt about a militia? i see something about the security of a free state.

p2rus

Same thing

militia = organized

everyone with gun = not organized

right?

It doest change the fact that it was written there because they wanted you to be able to protect your own rights yourself if your government began acting like BS

[QUOTE="DrCoCoPiMp"][QUOTE="p2rus"]

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.

So it wasnt about a militia? i see something about the security of a free state.

p2rus

Same thing

militia = organized

everyone with gun = not organized

right?

it also says the right of the people to keep and bear arms.

one thing gun control advocates and gun owners agree on, is that its worded very poorly.

however, you have to look at history. Almost everyone, even those who didnt fight had guns back then when the country was formed. Even after we won indipendance. So I think its safe to say that the founders meant for everyone to be armed. Especially considering the fact that a lot of our founders released statements in regards to people being armed to fight the government. I think it was jefferson who said there should be a violent revolution every 20 years. Shows you how he feels haha

All i know is the only way you are going to get my gun is if you pry it from my cold dead fingers.

I think that those who have a criminal background with the use of a gun should never be alowed to own a gun ever again.

The founders meant a lot of things, but you cant just say "well the founders didnt mean for you to have freedom on the INTERNET! so no you cant say anything on the internet...thats not speech." "Women? no theyre not equal!"p2rus

Actually, I think if they knew what the internet was I think they would be okay with freedom on it.

I cant really comment on the woman thing, as ive never seen any (PERSONALLY/PRIVATELY WRITTEN) comments theyve made towards them like i have with other subjects.

I know most of our founders were anti-slavery but only kept it (and their slaves) to persuade the south to help them fight.

So, basically what im saying is the founders probably wanted a lot more freedom for everyone but couldnt quite get it at the time. I agree with the basic bill of rights and such, for all americans. Its the foundation of our society and I dont like the idea of removing that, because things might get a bit nasty.

[QUOTE="p2rus"]The founders meant a lot of things, but you cant just say "well the founders didnt mean for you to have freedom on the INTERNET! so no you cant say anything on the internet...thats not speech." "Women? no theyre not equal!"H8sMikeMoore

Actually, I think if they knew what the internet was I think they would be okay with freedom on it.

I cant really comment on the woman thing, as ive never seen any (PERSONALLY/PRIVATELY WRITTEN) comments theyve made towards them like i have with other subjects.

I know most of our founders were anti-slavery but only kept it (and their slaves) to persuade the south to help them fight.

So, basically what im saying is the founders probably wanted a lot more freedom for everyone but couldnt quite get it at the time. I agree with the basic bill of rights and such, for all americans. Its the foundation of our society and I dont like the idea of removing that, because things might get a bit nasty.

without constitution and bill of rights we all are apes

without constitution and bill of rights we all are apes

DrCoCoPiMp

believe it or not there are other countries...i know you can say that their revolutions were based of america's revolution, but its not like if today we were like ok no bill of rights...europe would keep on rolling.

right but just worshipping the bill of rights is pretty backwards, we have to take those IDEALS and ideas rather than the actual words. Who cares what the founders would have thought? Really, we have to make america today more equal. so yes the ideals are there but you cant just recyle the words of the founders as the words of godp2rus

freedom is equal. thats what they wanted. I happen to agree with them.

I don t believe in god, so as far as im concerned the bill of rights is better than the bible.

[QUOTE="p2rus"]right but just worshipping the bill of rights is pretty backwards, we have to take those IDEALS and ideas rather than the actual words. Who cares what the founders would have thought? Really, we have to make america today more equal. so yes the ideals are there but you cant just recyle the words of the founders as the words of godH8sMikeMoore

freedom is equal. thats what they wanted. I happen to agree with them.

I don t believe in god, so as far as im concerned the bill of rights is better than the bible.

ok so you agree with their ideals, but there is no reason to have a strict interpretation of the bill of rights..

[QUOTE="DrCoCoPiMp"]

without constitution and bill of rights we all are apes

p2rus

believe it or not there are other countries...i know you can say that their revolutions were based of america's revolution, but its not like if today we were like ok no bill of rights...europe would keep on rolling.

constitution and bill of right is the only thing that keep the the govt from putting you in jail when you criticise them.

This is only one exemple based on freedom of speech, there could be so much more

[QUOTE="H8sMikeMoore"]

[QUOTE="p2rus"]right but just worshipping the bill of rights is pretty backwards, we have to take those IDEALS and ideas rather than the actual words. Who cares what the founders would have thought? Really, we have to make america today more equal. so yes the ideals are there but you cant just recyle the words of the founders as the words of godp2rus

freedom is equal. thats what they wanted. I happen to agree with them.

I don t believe in god, so as far as im concerned the bill of rights is better than the bible.

ok so you agree with their ideals, but there is no reason to have a strict interpretation of the bill of rights..

I agree with it to the letter.

So, I actually think we should be very strict to insure those rights are not alienated.

[QUOTE="p2rus"][QUOTE="DrCoCoPiMp"]

without constitution and bill of rights we all are apes

DrCoCoPiMp

believe it or not there are other countries...i know you can say that their revolutions were based of america's revolution, but its not like if today we were like ok no bill of rights...europe would keep on rolling.

constitution and bill of right is the only thing that keep the the govt from putting you in jail when you criticise them.

This is only one exemple based on freedom of speech, there could be so much more

Yes, but its not neccessarily those documents, its those ideals. If we got rid of the bill of rights but still had those ideals, then that wouldnt be a big deal. So you know we've got ideals when you cant trust the govt...and who says they even follow their own constitution anyway?

Really? What do you think about the court of appeals and the judicial system? If we follow it to the letter, we wouldnt have a court of appeals or anything besides the supreme court. also, that means that we would elect representatives through the state legislature, and slaves would be worth 3/5 of a person.

unless you automatically agree with any amendment.

that means that if tommorrow, there was a consitutional amendment that made abortion legal and gave everyone universal healthcare, you would agree with it?

[QUOTE="DrCoCoPiMp"][QUOTE="p2rus"][QUOTE="DrCoCoPiMp"]

without constitution and bill of rights we all are apes

p2rus

believe it or not there are other countries...i know you can say that their revolutions were based of america's revolution, but its not like if today we were like ok no bill of rights...europe would keep on rolling.

constitution and bill of right is the only thing that keep the the govt from putting you in jail when you criticise them.

This is only one exemple based on freedom of speech, there could be so much more

Yes, but its not neccessarily those documents, its those ideals. If we got rid of the bill of rights but still had those ideals, then that wouldnt be a big deal. So you know we've got ideals when you cant trust the govt...and who says they even follow their own constitution anyway?

Constitution is supposed to be the SUPREME LAW ALL OVER THE COUNTRY. Govt hates it, obviously. That's why FEMA is there, along with all the magnificient executive orders

http://www.mindfully.org/Reform/2004/FEMA-Concentration-Camps3sep04.htm

[QUOTE="DrCoCoPiMp"][QUOTE="p2rus"][QUOTE="DrCoCoPiMp"]

without constitution and bill of rights we all are apes

p2rus

believe it or not there are other countries...i know you can say that their revolutions were based of america's revolution, but its not like if today we were like ok no bill of rights...europe would keep on rolling.

constitution and bill of right is the only thing that keep the the govt from putting you in jail when you criticise them.

This is only one exemple based on freedom of speech, there could be so much more

Yes, but its not neccessarily those documents, its those ideals. If we got rid of the bill of rights but still had those ideals, then that wouldnt be a big deal. So you know we've got ideals when you cant trust the govt...and who says they even follow their own constitution anyway?

Well our country is based off of laws. Those are laws. I dont really see what good effect could come of getting rid of the bill of rights. Im not even sure what point youre trying to make

Really? What do you think about the court of appeals and the judicial system? If we follow it to the letter, we wouldnt have a court of appeals or anything besides the supreme court. also, that means that we would elect representatives through the state legislature, and slaves would be worth 3/5 of a person.

unless you automatically agree with any amendment.

that means that if tommorrow, there was a consitutional amendment that made abortion legal and gave everyone universal healthcare, you would agree with it?

p2rus

laws of the constitution can really be anything. Im talking specifically about the bill of rights, not the other laws.

Nothing in the bill of rights mentions slavery, even though there was slavery at the time.

[QUOTE="p2rus"]

Really? What do you think about the court of appeals and the judicial system? If we follow it to the letter, we wouldnt have a court of appeals or anything besides the supreme court. also, that means that we would elect representatives through the state legislature, and slaves would be worth 3/5 of a person.

unless you automatically agree with any amendment.

that means that if tommorrow, there was a consitutional amendment that made abortion legal and gave everyone universal healthcare, you would agree with it?

H8sMikeMoore

laws of the constitution can really be anything. Im talking specifically about the bill of rights, not the other laws.

Nothing in the bill of rights mentions slavery, even though there was slavery at the time.

bill of rights + constitution...

My point is that those documents arent amazing. its those ideals and ideas behind the words that matter. respect for human life, not the paper and the exact words of the constitution.p2rus

It dosent seem like what you're preaching is practical, or even needed for that matter.

Its already written, and if you agree with the ideas you might as well keep it there.

[QUOTE="p2rus"]My point is that those documents arent amazing. its those ideals and ideas behind the words that matter. respect for human life, not the paper and the exact words of the constitution.H8sMikeMoore

It dosent seem like what you're preaching is practical, or even needed for that matter.

Its already written, and if you agree with the ideas you might as well keep it there.

Just interesting that you say "i want to follow the consitution word for word"

then use those same words to limit those freedoms...

i am assuming you are a strict intepreter of course.

[QUOTE="H8sMikeMoore"]

[QUOTE="p2rus"]My point is that those documents arent amazing. its those ideals and ideas behind the words that matter. respect for human life, not the paper and the exact words of the constitution.p2rus

It dosent seem like what you're preaching is practical, or even needed for that matter.

Its already written, and if you agree with the ideas you might as well keep it there.

Just interesting that you say "i want to follow the consitution word for word"

then use those same words to limit those freedoms...

i am assuming you are a strict intepreter of course.

I said I agreed with the bill of rights to the letter. youre fighting an uphill battle, with no real goal in sight.

Like i said, if the bill of rights was amended so that abortion was protected, would you agree with it then? do you agree with the bill of rights because it is a vehicle of your beliefs or because you agree with the ideals of a bill of rights, supreme laws protecting human rightsp2rus

what are you talking about? the bill of rights had nothing to do with abortion...

any one who wants gun control is a communist and should be exiled to Cuba to live out the rest of their days as a ram farmer.. Seriously we have a right to bare armes, and if a gov't official tries to take it away then they are against the constitution and thus no fit to be in leadership position. ferrari2001

Bingo. They pledge allegiance, doing around the const = traitors to their country

[QUOTE="p2rus"]Like i said, if the bill of rights was amended so that abortion was protected, would you agree with it then? do you agree with the bill of rights because it is a vehicle of your beliefs or because you agree with the ideals of a bill of rights, supreme laws protecting human rightsH8sMikeMoore

what are you talking about? the bill of rights had nothing to do with abortion...

can you read?

any one who wants gun control is a communist and should be exiled to Cuba to live out the rest of their days as a ram farmer.. Seriously we have a right to bare armes, and if a gov't official tries to take it away then they are against the constitution and thus no fit to be in leadership position. ferrari2001

So there shouldn't be any kind of control on owning a gun? Like the NIU shooter who went off his anti-depression meds and was allowed to buy 3 weapons at once, is that ok?

[QUOTE="H8sMikeMoore"]

[QUOTE="p2rus"]Like i said, if the bill of rights was amended so that abortion was protected, would you agree with it then? do you agree with the bill of rights because it is a vehicle of your beliefs or because you agree with the ideals of a bill of rights, supreme laws protecting human rightsp2rus

what are you talking about? the bill of rights had nothing to do with abortion...

can you read?

yes I can, and I honestly dont think you know what youre talking about. Please show me some evidence that the bill of rights had anything to do with abortion (it didnt)

Now, were not talking about the constitution. Were talking about the bill of rights.

So you feel like only the 1st 10 amendments should be read to the letter, and that the rest is... p2rus

i think the bill of rights should be kept the way it is. The rest of the constitution could be ammended for whatever the people vote for. I think that was t he general idea anyway

[QUOTE="VoodooGamer"]What do you think about it?H8sMikeMoore

I dont really like it.

if more people are armed, the less crime well have. Criminals prey on the weak, and if everyone is armed nobody is weak. as far as im concerned, police officers arent quick enough, especially if you're gonna get murdered.

also, with people interested in doing some sort of massacre they would be at a severe disadvantage if all the people they wanted to kill were armed as well. Most people are good people, so the bad ones wouldnt stand a chance.

I agree.

[QUOTE="VoodooGamer"]What do you think about it?H8sMikeMoore

I dont really like it.

if more people are armed, the less crime well have. Criminals prey on the weak, and if everyone is armed nobody is weak. as far as im concerned, police officers arent quick enough, especially if you're gonna get murdered.

also, with people interested in doing some sort of massacre they would be at a severe disadvantage if all the people they wanted to kill were armed as well. Most people are good people, so the bad ones wouldnt stand a chance.

This right here is all that needs to be said. Suppressing Citizens rights only give criminals more of an advantage.