The Conservative Cave
Current Events => The DUmpster => Topic started by: dutch508 on October 01, 2015, 11:56:57 PM
-
TheProgressive (696 posts) http://www.democraticunderground.com/10027220511
Its simple: handguns and high capacity magazines must be prohibited.
For all the gun nuts, they can have their shot guns and 22's, etc.
This does not violate the 2nd Amendment.
When the US Constitution and Amendments were written, only the single shot rifle and pistol were available.
We have established laws for free speech - we can establish laws for 'things' that, when 'used as directed' KILLS people.
Its ****ing time. Period...
Brilliant.
TheProgressive (696 posts)
2. It will happen if enough people advocate for it...Once Senator Sanders is President, these types of changes will happen.
Snobblevitch (763 posts)
16. I know I will be pounding my head into a wall, but using your logic, the 1st Amendment only applies to words written on paper with a quill pen, printed using a primitive printing press, or speaking.
NutmegYankee (10,166 posts)
19. It would be a novel way to shut down Fox News.
Just state that Freedom of the Press only applies if you actually publish with a printing press. After all, it's called "freedom of the press".
The left is always looking for a way to destroy their opponents.
TheProgressive (696 posts)
20. 'Freedom of Speech' does not kill people if used as directed.
Guns do.
And let revisit the 2nd Amendment...
"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."
Let's enforce the entire amendment....
TheProgressive (696 posts)
24. Silly statement (no offense)...The only purpose of 'arms' is to kill...
(target shooting is practice for killing)...
:thatsright:
TheProgressive (696 posts)
38. You don't need a handgun or a high cap magazine to protect your family...
TheProgressive (696 posts)
43. Do you belong to a militia?
Whats a preliminary requirement according to the language of the 2nd Amendment...
GGJohn (5,908 posts)
46. Sorry, but that argument has been settled by Heller v DC.
The SCOTUS ruled that the 2a confers a right to possess firearms not connected to militia service.
TheProgressive (696 posts)
48. By the right-wing conservative Supreme Court.
Rulings can be overturned... (not easy, but it can be done).
GGJohn (5,908 posts)
32. SCOTUS has already ruled that possession of handguns are a constitutional right, so, yeah,
it would violate the 2A.
And the American public is dead set against a handgun ban by a margin of 75% to 25%.
Star Member Hoyt (21,328 posts)
37. In the DU Gun Proection Society's view, anyway.
-
If only one of those students had a concealed carry handgun.
Apparently an air force vet was on campus and a concealed carry holder, but the administration would not let him leave the building.
-
TheProgressive (696 posts)
20. 'Freedom of Speech' does not kill people if used as directed.
Guns do.
You're a phucking idiot...
And let revisit the 2nd Amendment...
"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."
Let's enforce the entire amendment....
Oh, by all means. THE WHOLE THING.
(http://www.toonopolis.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/reading_is_fundamental.jpg)
And that, kids, is how the words dumb and ass got put together.
-
TheProgressive (696 posts)
48. By the right-wing conservative Supreme Court.
Rulings can be overturned... (not easy, but it can be done).
That includes abortion, right?
-
Somebody compare the posters on this thread who advocate for banning guns over a few small, isolated incidents, representing .00000000001% of gun owners in this country, with those on the muzzie thread saying you couldn't justify stereotyping the muzzies, over the rapist bastards in Germany over a couple of bad apples.
KC
-
TheProgressive (696 posts)
38. You don't need a handgun or a high cap magazine to protect your family...
You can piss and puke on yourself to try and deter an attack on your family, let me decide how best to defend mine. :bird:
-
You could just as easily say that at the time it was written, a private individual could own any weapon in the inventory of the best-equipped armies and navies of the world at the time, musket, rifle, pistol, cannon, carronade, howitzer, mortar, or grenade.
At this point it remains totally unclear what role the high-capacity thing played, or even the handguns, all we know is the dude had three handguns and a longarm, types unspecified. Nor do we know if he got them at yard sales, swiped them from family or friends, borrowed them, or even bought them with a full background check.
-
Every one should be given an automatic weapon when they enter first grade. Survival of the fittest and all.
-
http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2013/05/07/gun-homicide-rate-down-49-since-1993-peak-public-unaware/
Reality check, DUmbasses.
-
TheProgressive (696 posts) http://www.democraticunderground.com/10027220511
When the US Constitution and Amendments were written, only the single shot rifle and pistol were available.
I guess the smartest people in the world never heard of Leonardo DaVinci, or realize he predated the constitution...
(https://s.yimg.com/fz/api/res/1.2/yuK3BC9DfHRWyOAMBpDvyA--/YXBwaWQ9c3JjaGRkO2g9Mzc4O3E9OTU7dz01MDA-/http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51SY3AvEelL.jpg)
-
I guess the smartest people in the world never heard of Leonardo DaVinci, or realize he predated the constitution...
(https://s.yimg.com/fz/api/res/1.2/yuK3BC9DfHRWyOAMBpDvyA--/YXBwaWQ9c3JjaGRkO2g9Mzc4O3E9OTU7dz01MDA-/http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51SY3AvEelL.jpg)
High five!
These, too:
(http://www.heritage.nf.ca/articles/exploration/images/british-warship-500.jpg)
-
If only one of those students had a concealed carry handgun.
Apparently an air force vet was on campus and a concealed carry holder, but the administration would not let him leave the building.
I keep thinking if the Army vet who put himself between his classmates and the gunman was armed there wouldn't have been a mass murder.
Cindie
-
You could just as easily say that at the time it was written, a private individual could own any weapon in the inventory of the best-equipped armies and navies of the world at the time, musket, rifle, pistol, cannon, carronade, howitzer, mortar, or grenade.
At the time there was ten times more privately owned cannons on our side than government owned cannons. But the DUchebags will never hold Hitler responsible for bombing Pearl Harbor.
-
At the time there was ten times more privately owned cannons on our side than government owned cannons. But the DUchebags will never hold Hitler responsible for bombing Pearl Harbor.
Bluto? Is that you?
-
Well all I can say is that it is unpossible that this shooting even occurred. This was a gun-free zone. Guns were not allowed!!!
-
Well all I can say is that it is unpossible that this shooting even occurred. This was a gun-free zone. Guns were not allowed!!!
C'mon man. You misunderstand. The no gun zone only applies to students, he wasn't a student, therefore, the ban didn't apply to him.
-
Bluto? Is that you?
Stand back! I'm on a roll.
-
DUmmies need to realize the 2nd Amendment doesn't have a damned thing to do with hunting. How many rounds my 9mm holds is none of anybody's business except me, and whatever retard thinks it's a good idea to break into my house, because whatever my magazine holds is what I intend to use. Times 3 if necessary. :naughty:
-
TheProgressive (696 posts) http://www.democraticunderground.com/10027220511
...
When the US Constitution and Amendments were written, only the single shot rifle and pistol were available.
The 2nd Amendment recognized the right to own the best technology of the day. :loser: Thanks for pointing out that fact! :loser:
TheProgressive (696 posts)
24. Silly statement (no offense)...The only purpose of 'arms' is to kill...
(target shooting is practice for killing)...
Yet, strangely according to this "reasoning", the vast majority of guns and gun owners in the US never even attempt to kill a human being. TP's (how apt!) hysterical alarmism is not borne out by reality (anybody surprised?).
TheProgressive (696 posts)
38. You don't need a handgun or a high cap magazine to protect your family...
Really? How many times have you done it? What experience do you have that proved this assertion? Having a 75% full magazine after a successful self-defense is a lot better than running out and getting killed as a consequence. Even better is being prepared for something that seldom happens; infrequence is not a valid pretext for banning the means of self-defense, either.
[puote]TheProgressive (696 posts)
43. Do you belong to a militia?
Whats a preliminary requirement according to the language of the 2nd Amendment...[/quote]
:thatsright: So, by TP's "reasoning" women had no right to own fire arms until they were allowed in the military? :thatsright: If analyzed by the sentence diagramming skills TP should have learned by the 8th Grade, it's clear that the purpose the 2nd Amendment cited for recognizing the right to own fire arms was so that most members of a militia would show up for muster already skilled in the use of fire arms (and, in the early days of the US, armed with their own rifle).