bush_cheney2004 Posted February 20, 2018 Report Share Posted February 20, 2018 1 minute ago, August1991 said: I have not read through this thread. The US Constitution is a remarkable document - but it's far from perfect. The 2nd Amendment should be repealed, amended. A smart politician could do this. Good luck with that...ever heard of Meech Lake ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
August1991 Posted February 20, 2018 Report Share Posted February 20, 2018 3 minutes ago, bush_cheney2004 said: ... The question has already been adjudicated by the only U.S. court that matters....Americans have the right to own and bear firearms (for now). ... Gimme a break. Define "firearms". ==== The 2nd Amendment should be repealed. A smart politician, say Donald Trump, should oppose the NRA. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted February 20, 2018 Report Share Posted February 20, 2018 (edited) 5 minutes ago, August1991 said: Gimme a break. Define "firearms". ==== The 2nd Amendment should be repealed. A smart politician, say Donald Trump, should oppose the NRA. You'd have a better chance of repealing the monarchy in Canada. The issue is background checks before firearms sales, not ownership. Trump and NRA are willing to move on background checks, with due process and appeal to help stop guns sales to criminals and the mentally ill. I don't have any problem with background checks for "loophole" sales as long as the process is legitimate. Edited February 20, 2018 by bush_cheney2004 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
August1991 Posted February 20, 2018 Report Share Posted February 20, 2018 4 minutes ago, bush_cheney2004 said: Good luck with that...ever heard of Meech Lake ? Yes, and have you heard of the 1982 Charter? The GST? Heck, even the FTA? IMHO, despite what the Leftist US MSM claims, I reckon Trump's a mix of Trudeau Snr and Mulroney - with NYC moxie. ====== All this aside, I think the US should make its Central Bank a part of its federal constitution (equal to the Congress, Supreme Court, Executive) and it should abolish the 2nd Amendment. In this, the US Constitution is a wonderful (amendable) relic from the 18th century. In 1780, no one understood the importance of a central bank. And in 1780, no one knew what a semi-automatic was. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted February 20, 2018 Report Share Posted February 20, 2018 4 minutes ago, August1991 said: Yes, and have you heard of the 1982 Charter? The GST? Heck, even the FTA? Yes, and even with 200 more years of hindsight, Pierre Trudeau still did not do as well as America's founders (e.g. "Notwithstanding Clause"). Quote In this, the US Constitution is a wonderful (amendable) relic from the 18th century. In 1780, no one understood the importance of a central bank. And in 1780, no one knew what a semi-automatic was. No one knew what wire-tapping, abortion rights, or Miranda rights were either. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
?Impact Posted February 20, 2018 Report Share Posted February 20, 2018 2 hours ago, bush_cheney2004 said: I personally had access to hundreds of thermonuclear warheads and delivery systems, regardless of the 2nd Amendment. Access to is not the same thing as bearing arms. Your access was limited, as was the access of others. There was a procedure that involved others to provide complete access (touch, transport, arm, fire, etc.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted February 20, 2018 Report Share Posted February 20, 2018 1 hour ago, ?Impact said: Access to is not the same thing as bearing arms. Your access was limited, as was the access of others. There was a procedure that involved others to provide complete access (touch, transport, arm, fire, etc.) That's the whole point....the 2nd Amendment has nothing to do with owning and bearing nuclear weapons, despite such silly ass arguments to the contrary. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted February 20, 2018 Report Share Posted February 20, 2018 12 hours ago, bush_cheney2004 said: School vouchers, school choice, tenure, abortion limits, right-to-work laws, etc., etc. None of those have anything like 90% support. Most don't even have 50% 12 hours ago, bush_cheney2004 said: Nothing special about the Democrat's funding sources and special interests compared to the NRA. 90% of southern Democrats wanted to keep slavery. As opposed to those far thinking liberal southern Republicans? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted February 20, 2018 Report Share Posted February 20, 2018 5 hours ago, bush_cheney2004 said: That's the whole point....the 2nd Amendment has nothing to do with owning and bearing nuclear weapons, despite such silly ass arguments to the contrary. It has nothing to do with owning weapons so you can shoot people who knock at your door either. It's entirely about a well-regulated militia. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
taxme Posted February 20, 2018 Report Share Posted February 20, 2018 21 hours ago, Kerfuffle said: Better yet...have a small swat team installed in every school and every kid wear a bullet proof jacket.....that should be easier than bringing in gun control and would create 2-3 hundred thousand jobs.... What I do not understand is why anyone needs to own a gun that fires hundreds of bullets a second especially in America. Is America at war with itself? A six shooter is all one needs to defend themselves or a hunting rifle for gathering food. The rest need to be banned. Just saying. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted February 20, 2018 Report Share Posted February 20, 2018 2 hours ago, Argus said: It has nothing to do with owning weapons so you can shoot people who knock at your door either. It's entirely about a well-regulated militia. Sorry, but the U.S. Supreme Court disagrees, and it does not take legal advice from Canadians "north of the border". Americans can legally shoot people at the door if they threaten others. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted February 20, 2018 Report Share Posted February 20, 2018 1 minute ago, taxme said: What I do not understand is why anyone needs to own a gun that fires hundreds of bullets a second especially in America. Is America at war with itself? A six shooter is all one needs to defend themselves or a hunting rifle for gathering food. The rest need to be banned. Just saying. Automatic weapons (machine guns) are banned in America. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
?Impact Posted February 20, 2018 Report Share Posted February 20, 2018 10 minutes ago, bush_cheney2004 said: Automatic weapons (machine guns) are banned in America. How many fully automatic weapons, capable of firing 600+ rounds per minute, did the Las Vegas shooter have. I know we will get the gun nuts hiding behind weasel semantics about how it was accomplished, but the fact is the gun easily shot at that rate sustained from high capacity magazines. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
taxme Posted February 20, 2018 Report Share Posted February 20, 2018 30 minutes ago, bush_cheney2004 said: Sorry, but the U.S. Supreme Court disagrees, and it does not take legal advice from Canadians "north of the border". Americans can legally shoot people at the door if they threaten others. If anyone enters someone's home illegally and gets shot dead well it is to bad for them. They should have not entered anyone's home without permission. Everyone should know that by now that it is wrong and illegal to enter someone's home without permission. There should be no questions asked of the home owner. Short, sweet and simple. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
taxme Posted February 20, 2018 Report Share Posted February 20, 2018 39 minutes ago, bush_cheney2004 said: Automatic weapons (machine guns) are banned in America. What about the other guns that fire dozens of rounds or more a second? Is there really a need for someone to own guns like that living in a peaceful not at war with itself country? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted February 20, 2018 Report Share Posted February 20, 2018 1 minute ago, taxme said: What about the other guns that fire dozens of rounds or more a second? Is there really a need for someone to own guns like that living in a peaceful not at war with itself country? Yes....such semi-auto firearms are also sold and owned in Canada as "restricted" weapons. Why do Canadians own them ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
taxme Posted February 20, 2018 Report Share Posted February 20, 2018 20 minutes ago, bush_cheney2004 said: Yes....such semi-auto firearms are also sold and owned in Canada as "restricted" weapons. Why do Canadians own them ? Beats me as to why anyone would want to own any type of gun other than a six shooter or a hunting rifle is beyond me. What more does the average American or Canadian need to protect themselves from harm or go hunting for food? Just saying. 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted February 20, 2018 Report Share Posted February 20, 2018 (edited) 15 minutes ago, taxme said: Beats me as to why anyone would want to own any type of gun other than a six shooter or a hunting rifle is beyond me. What more does the average American or Canadian need to protect themselves from harm or go hunting for food? Just saying. Target shooting, collecting, re-selling, gunsmiths, etc. President Trump just signed a bump stock directive, consistent with NRA agreeing to ban them. Edited February 20, 2018 by bush_cheney2004 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blackbird Posted February 20, 2018 Report Share Posted February 20, 2018 On 2018-02-14 at 4:23 PM, bush_cheney2004 said: Old, failed argument...criminals and the mentally ill don't care about legislation. There has to be happy medium which would bring safety and security to people. The massive number of people killed by guns can't be a solution. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blackbird Posted February 20, 2018 Report Share Posted February 20, 2018 (edited) 1 hour ago, bush_cheney2004 said: Target shooting, collecting, re-selling, gunsmiths, etc. President Trump just signed a bump stock directive, consistent with NRA agreeing to ban them. Who needs a semi automatic or military style automatic firearm? The only people who should have such weapons are military or police. If people want to collect those kind of weapons, they should have their internal workings removed, given to authorities, and be certified as completely unusable and impossible to return a functioning weapon. But maybe just ban them completely. Collectors would be out of that business. They can go collect something more benign . Edited February 20, 2018 by blackbird 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blackbird Posted February 20, 2018 Report Share Posted February 20, 2018 (edited) 2 hours ago, bush_cheney2004 said: Yes....such semi-auto firearms are also sold and owned in Canada as "restricted" weapons. Why do Canadians own them ? I am not sure what the Canadian laws are around restricted weapons. Is there a requirement that they be locked up at a gun club or rifle range? Hunting rifles have a restriction that only allow them to hold something like 5 cartridges in the clip. Same with shotguns. They are classified as non-restricted firearms. The advantage of requiring certain firearms locked up at a gun club is they can only be accessed at certain times and used only at the gun club. They cannot be removed from the premises. And someone else such as the authorized officer of the range must unlock it and be responsible for seeing it is not taken off the range. Edited February 20, 2018 by blackbird 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted February 20, 2018 Report Share Posted February 20, 2018 24 minutes ago, blackbird said: There has to be happy medium which would bring safety and security to people. The massive number of people killed by guns can't be a solution. The baby killing abortion rights folks haven't agreed to a "happy medium", so I don't know why the gun nuts are expected to just roll over on their constitutionally enumerated gun rights. Trying to take the guns away would result in larger conflict and shootings. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
?Impact Posted February 20, 2018 Report Share Posted February 20, 2018 18 minutes ago, bush_cheney2004 said: Trying to take the guns away would result in larger conflict and shootings. So you are saying that the self proclaimed responsible gun owners are just thugs? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kerfuffle Posted February 21, 2018 Author Report Share Posted February 21, 2018 (edited) 5 hours ago, bush_cheney2004 said: Sorry, but the U.S. Supreme Court disagrees, and it does not take legal advice from Canadians "north of the border". Americans can legally shoot people at the door if they threaten others. The Supreme court 2nd amendment desicion ...The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home. Also... the sorts of weapons protected are those “in common use at the time” finds support in the historical tradition of prohibiting the carrying of dangerous and unusual weapons....could this apply to semi automatic Edited February 21, 2018 by Kerfuffle Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted February 21, 2018 Report Share Posted February 21, 2018 48 minutes ago, Kerfuffle said: The Supreme court 2nd amendment desicion ...The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home. Depends...and varies by state....deadly force is permitted to prevent death or injury to oneself or others. Concealed carry holders have lawfully dispatched perps outside of their homes and on public property. The more narrow "castle doctrine" generally permits lawful firearms uses against intruders in the home, regardless of their (unknown) intentions. Quote Also... the sorts of weapons protected are those “in common use at the time” finds support in the historical tradition of prohibiting the carrying of dangerous and unusual weapons....could this apply to semi automatic No, as many commonly used firearms today incorporate semi-automatic loading action, from sporting shotguns to handguns. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.9a49e1b2f22a6d34a345152c50044aa9.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.