Will the Second Amendment survive? - Page 19

icileparadise · 12-15-2007, 04:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Radar

If someone has gone to jail and been released, they should have 100% of their rights restored. This includes the right to vote, the right to own guns, and all other rights. If they pose an danger to others, they should not be released from jail.

Okay I'm just catching up, Radar if you have a professional Army with Navy and Air Force the best in the world and the National Guard and then the CIA FBI DEA NSA etc... and Federal Marshalls and State troopers and police who are also efficiently armed, Defense companies, security companies . Then sportsmen and women - hunters, skeet shooters, target etc.etc. then home owners, citizens ... who does'nt own or have access to a gun in America? I think American Hospitals must have the best gunshot wound doctors in the World except for those in battle zones.

I would very much hope that a released convict could never legally gain a firearms certificate upon their liberation - probation would forbid it even with State differences. I'm not arguing your right to bear arms Radar, but you are exactly arguing for them because of your next door neighbour potentially flying off the handle. Let the Police deal with it, I don't want you to pull the trigger. If someone pulls a gun on you and you're carrying what you gonna do? Give them anything they want. You and they will live.

slang · 12-15-2007, 04:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Radar

If someone has gone to jail and been released, they should have 100% of their rights restored.

Ok. I'm just trying to understand your position.

Good answer.

Radar · 12-15-2007, 05:00 PM

There is no such thing as an "assault rifle". All weapons can be used for defense or assault. When the L.A. Riots happened, several Korean store owners patrolled the roof of their business with uzi 9mm, and AK-47s and defend their store when the police wouldn't or couldn't. This weapon allowed them to defend against multiple attackers.

The U.S. government has absolutely zero authority to ban any kind of gun for any reason. The same is true of all state and local governments. 100% of gun control laws are a violation of the Constitution and more importantly of our civil rights.

If the government removed these unconstitutional laws, you can rest assured, there would be plenty of private rocket launcher owners.

Either way, the American people have enough firepower to overcome the U.S. military. The fact of the matter is all of the institutions you mentioned have very few people who would actually fire on Americans for defending their right to keep and bear arms. In fact very few would fire on Americans trying to overthrow the government and take their country back...with the exception of the most scummy elements like the NSA, CIA, etc.

The majority of those in the military, national guard, and local police would not fire on Americans and would fire on those who did.

slang · 12-15-2007, 05:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Radar

....In fact very few would fire on Americans trying to overthrow the government and take their country back

I don't want to get all tinfoil hat here but what about foreign troops on US soil to round things up?

Radar · 12-15-2007, 05:14 PM

I'm not wearing the tinfoil hat either. Government oppression was the main reason the founders wanted to defend the right of individuals to own any kind of guns the government has.

I sincerely doubt foreign armies would get involved if the people of America were to revolt, and if they did, they'd probably support the people not the government.

deadbeater · 12-15-2007, 06:31 PM

I know of at least couple of organizations very eager to support 'the people' if and when the time comes. They come from the Middle East, and neither one of them is the Saudi family.

Let's see, if 22 people with boxcutters can kill three thousand, I think the US military could take on every single American citizen. It would take, oh, about 100,000.

Radar · 12-15-2007, 07:41 PM

You are smoking spearmint flavored crack if you think 100,000 military could beat an armed populace. They've got 140,000 in Iraq right now and can't handle Arabs with homemade bombs.

Ibby · 12-15-2007, 09:11 PM

Deadbeater... you've got it back-fucking-assward. It's the other way around; like radar says, a civilian insurgency can take on a military force any day.

jinx · 12-15-2007, 09:23 PM

Especially a military force pitted against their own families, friends, and country's infrastructure. You might have a few deserters...

Radar · 12-16-2007, 12:50 AM

Who needs one with an old serial #? The laws banning them sunsetted. They are legal again. Well, they were legal the whole time, but the unconstitutional law is gone.

Radar · 12-16-2007, 11:40 AM

I'd be willing to bet there are more machine guns in the hands of American civilians than in the hands of the U.S. military.

slang · 12-16-2007, 11:42 AM

Legal manufacture or hacked?

By civilians you mean gang members or collectors and target shooters?

slang · 12-16-2007, 03:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Radar

I'd be willing to bet there are more machine guns in the hands of American civilians than in the hands of the U.S. military.

Ok, I'll put 10 pesos on Radar for this one.

The gangs, the collectors, and the ex-military guys have more.

TheMercenary · 12-16-2007, 03:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Radar

I'd be willing to bet there are more machine guns in the hands of American civilians than in the hands of the U.S. military.

I would doubt that. The majority of all rifles in the inventory can fire on full auto. Plus the military has much more ammo than any civilian could hope to own.

I will now exercise my right not to read the last 9 pages of this circular argument.

xoxoxoBruce · 12-16-2007, 03:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by piercehawkeye45

How much is plenty? I know there are a good amount but enough to stop the need of importing those types of guns? I honestly don't know this so I am just making assumptions on the number.

Are you wondering, if civil unrest broke out it could be defeated by cutting off imports? No.

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

I would doubt that. The majority of all rifles in the inventory can fire on full auto.

Which they rarely use, because more than 3 rounds is inaccurate and wasteful.

12-15-2007, 05:00 PM	#3
Radar Constitutional Scholar Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Ocala, FL Posts: 4,006	There is no such thing as an "assault rifle". All weapons can be used for defense or assault. When the L.A. Riots happened, several Korean store owners patrolled the roof of their business with uzi 9mm, and AK-47s and defend their store when the police wouldn't or couldn't. This weapon allowed them to defend against multiple attackers. The U.S. government has absolutely zero authority to ban any kind of gun for any reason. The same is true of all state and local governments. 100% of gun control laws are a violation of the Constitution and more importantly of our civil rights. If the government removed these unconstitutional laws, you can rest assured, there would be plenty of private rocket launcher owners. Either way, the American people have enough firepower to overcome the U.S. military. The fact of the matter is all of the institutions you mentioned have very few people who would actually fire on Americans for defending their right to keep and bear arms. In fact very few would fire on Americans trying to overthrow the government and take their country back...with the exception of the most scummy elements like the NSA, CIA, etc. The majority of those in the military, national guard, and local police would not fire on Americans and would fire on those who did. __________________ "I'm completely in favor of the separation of Church and State. My idea is that these two institutions screw us up enough on their own, so both of them together is certain death." - George Carlin

12-15-2007, 05:14 PM	#5
Radar Constitutional Scholar Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Ocala, FL Posts: 4,006	I'm not wearing the tinfoil hat either. Government oppression was the main reason the founders wanted to defend the right of individuals to own any kind of guns the government has. I sincerely doubt foreign armies would get involved if the people of America were to revolt, and if they did, they'd probably support the people not the government. __________________ "I'm completely in favor of the separation of Church and State. My idea is that these two institutions screw us up enough on their own, so both of them together is certain death." - George Carlin

12-15-2007, 07:41 PM	#7
Radar Constitutional Scholar Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Ocala, FL Posts: 4,006	You are smoking spearmint flavored crack if you think 100,000 military could beat an armed populace. They've got 140,000 in Iraq right now and can't handle Arabs with homemade bombs. __________________ "I'm completely in favor of the separation of Church and State. My idea is that these two institutions screw us up enough on their own, so both of them together is certain death." - George Carlin

12-15-2007, 09:11 PM	#8
Ibby erika Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: "the high up north" Posts: 6,127	Deadbeater... you've got it back-fucking-assward. It's the other way around; like radar says, a civilian insurgency can take on a military force any day. __________________ not really back, you didn't see me, i was never here shhhhhh

12-15-2007, 09:23 PM	#9
jinx Come on, cat. Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: general vicinity of Philadelphia area Posts: 7,013	Especially a military force pitted against their own families, friends, and country's infrastructure. You might have a few deserters... __________________ Crying won't help you, praying won't do you no good.

12-15-2007, 06:31 PM	#6
deadbeater Sir Post-A-Lot Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 439	I know of at least couple of organizations very eager to support 'the people' if and when the time comes. They come from the Middle East, and neither one of them is the Saudi family. Let's see, if 22 people with boxcutters can kill three thousand, I think the US military could take on every single American citizen. It would take, oh, about 100,000.

12-16-2007, 12:50 AM	#10
Radar Constitutional Scholar Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Ocala, FL Posts: 4,006	Who needs one with an old serial #? The laws banning them sunsetted. They are legal again. Well, they were legal the whole time, but the unconstitutional law is gone. __________________ "I'm completely in favor of the separation of Church and State. My idea is that these two institutions screw us up enough on their own, so both of them together is certain death." - George Carlin

12-16-2007, 11:40 AM	#11
Radar Constitutional Scholar Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Ocala, FL Posts: 4,006	I'd be willing to bet there are more machine guns in the hands of American civilians than in the hands of the U.S. military. __________________ "I'm completely in favor of the separation of Church and State. My idea is that these two institutions screw us up enough on their own, so both of them together is certain death." - George Carlin

12-16-2007, 11:42 AM	#12
slang St Petersburg, Florida Join Date: Oct 2002 Posts: 3,423	Legal manufacture or hacked? By civilians you mean gang members or collectors and target shooters?

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)