Reality Check on Gun Control

[MMM]

That's not how things work in this country dumbfck.

You don't need alcohol. You don't need cars that go faster than the speed limit. You don't need private planes. You don't need private boats. You don't need swimming pools. You don't need a million different things that kill or harm people every year.

But you know what I really don't need? I don't need mommy government telling me how to live my life and shitting all over my constitutional rights.

How are they shitting on your rights when the law they are proposing is constitutional???

[Myth]

But you know what I really don't need? I don't need mommy government telling me how to live my life and shitting all over my constitutional rights.

I just hope you take that same mindset when the issue of gay marriage comes up.

[bmulls]

I just hope you take that same mindset when the issue of gay marriage comes up.

I support gay marriage and you will not find a post by me that says anything otherwise

[Myth]

I support gay marriage and you will not find a post by me that says anything otherwise

Glad to hear it

That is one aspect of hypocrisy that I struggle with, when somebody wants government to stay out of their lives, but then are fine with it impeding on others' lives.

[boozehound]

I would oppose a ban on them on principle. I don't believe in setting an arbitrary number. First you ban 100 round drums, next people want to ban 50, next they want to ban 30 etc.

You don't need to worry about those anyway, they are notoriously faulty, to the point where they are a novelty item. They are more likely to jam than to chamber the entire magazine successfully. They are all made by knock off companies because respectable manufacturers know they are a joke. The Aurora shooter had one and his jammed after firing less than 30 rounds.

I have yet to see a cogent argument on how banning fully auto guns (or other arms like rpgs, landmines, etc) is constitutional (according to the SCOTUS), but further restrictions on the type of arms you can own are not. You seem fairly reasonable, though entrenched in your view. Can you argue this?

[bmulls]

How are they shitting on your rights when the law they are proposing is constitutional???

I've ignored this statement by you multiple times already on purpose. You're trying to get into an argument over semantics and I don't feel like wasting my time.

"The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed"

[Droid101]

"The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed"

You left off the first part:

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.


Call me when you're signed up for your local and well-regulated militia, and I'll let you bear some arms, bro.

[bmulls]

I have yet to see a cogent argument on how banning fully auto guns (or other arms like rpgs, landmines, etc) is constitutional (according to the SCOTUS), but further restrictions on the type of arms you can own are not. You seem fairly reasonable, though entrenched in your view. Can you argue this?

I would say because a rocket launcher, grenade, landmine, sawed off shotgun etc. can not be used for self defense without running the serious and unavoidable risk of injuring the wrong person. They are too imprecise.

[bmulls]

You left off the first part:

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.


Call me when you're signed up for your local and well-regulated militia, and I'll let you bear some arms, bro.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distric...mbia_v._Heller

[MMM]

I've ignored this statement by you multiple times already on purpose. You're trying to get into an argument over semantics and I don't feel like wasting my time.

"The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed"

Genuinely speaking how does this law specifically infringing on your right???

You can oppose the law because you believe it is not effective but I don't see how you can argue that it infringes on rights.

[IamRAMBO24]

Genuinely speaking how does this law specifically infringing on your right???

You can oppose the law because you believe it is not effective but I don't see how you can argue that it infringes on rights.

We do not know the extent of the new law but if they throw in some healthcare mandate, that will prob infringe on the rights of millions of people due to the fact that every single thing is consider a mental illness in some way or another.

[Myth]

We do not know the extent of the new law but if they throw in some healthcare mandate, that will prob infringe on the rights of millions of people due to the fact that every single thing is consider a mental illness in some way or another.

It certainly shouldn't be based on any diagnosis (not scared of people with Generalized Anxiety Disorder for example). But I'd be more than happy to know that people with paranoid schizophrenia or who score really high on the MMPI Psychopathic Deviate Scale are not allowed to have guns.

[Jackass18]

That's not how things work in this country dumbfck.

You don't need alcohol. You don't need cars that go faster than the speed limit. You don't need private planes. You don't need private boats. You don't need swimming pools. You don't need a million different things that kill or harm people every year.

But you know what I really don't need? I don't need mommy government telling me how to live my life and shitting all over my constitutional rights.

Those things have a purpose beyond inflicting harm/damage upon something. The Constitution partly tells you how to live your life.

I'm just curious what people need an assault rifle for.

[IamRAMBO24]

Those things have a purpose beyond inflicting harm/damage upon something. The Constitution partly tells you how to live your life.

I'm just curious what people need an assault rifle for.

Because the reason why they shouldn't is based on a fallacious argument of that they will go shoot up a school if they have an assault rifle.

Come up with a perfectly sound argument as to why they should not and I will support your premise, as is, it is full of deception and lies.

[Jackass18]

What is full of deception and lies?