Trump won’t help Puerto Rico
- Thread starter Sapidus
- Start date
PsyOps
Pixelated
Then explain France, England, Chicago, Detroit, San Bernardino... If banning firearms in Australia works in Australia that's great. But it has shown not to work in this country.
There is no reason to amend it. We should simply take it literally and you can feel free to own a musket that you need to load manually and can shoot off 2-3 shoots per minute if your powder isn't wet or you don't blow your hand off first. If you believe it needs to be amended to change it then it must have been created perfectly for the time period it was crafted in.
Yes. Because that is what we have been discussing for the last 33 pages. Is that hard to understand?
You say that over and over but never provide any proof. You also voted for someone "you are hugely critical of" I am seeing more and more Hitler parallels the more you talk.
Where is the word "musket" included in the 2A?
And why are you using the internet to express yourself instead of distributing your opinion from a box atop a sidewalk or writing it on parchment?
You do realize that you just automatically lost the argument right? Godwin's Law and all that...
As to England
"After both shootings the government called a gun amnesty, compensating owners for their weapons. After Dunblane, more than 162,000 handguns were surrendered.
There has been one mass shooting in the country since the laws were tightened. Derrick Bird killed 12 people in northern England's Whitehaven in 2010."
So im not sure what you are trying to say there.
France I agree has not been as successful and all the other places you mentioned are guess what? In America?
So you really showed me there
Do you not understand the word literally? We would give it it literal weight in accordance with the time it was written
Where is the word "musket" included in the 2A? Or "rifle"? "Cannon"? "Fowling piece"?
And wait until the doc tries to open you up with some 18th century surgical instruments, ole buddy.
Tell ya what. Why don't you and your liberal pals just make sure you've disposed of any and all firearms you might possess, leave the rest of us along, and we'll call it even. m'kay?
Again... why are you using the internet to express yourself instead of distributing your opinion from a box atop a sidewalk or writing it on parchment?
You can't even use logic correctly. Your comparison doesn't work. Unlike the 2nd which specifically mentions arms the 1st doesn't specifically say anything about the way speech is delivered that would limit it to the time period. Speech unlike arms are not the tool in this scenario so yet another logic fail and a stupid analogy.
PsyOps
Pixelated
So, there you have it. The 2nd amendment is limited to the technology available at that time it was written. Given that logic, they never anticipated an internet where people can insult and defame people anonymously, so I say everyone using the internet on forums, twitter, and other social media be fully exposed as to who they are, and not be allowed to spout defaming and derogatory comments, and be fully exposed as to who they are.
Last edited:
SamSpade
Well-Known Member
Try to list the mass shootings - aside from the few mentioned - that have EVER occurred in England. There have been only a handful in the last 100 years, and prior to that, mass shootings were the fault of the GOVERNMENT.
So claiming success with tightening gun laws in England is like standing on a corner in Hollywood claiming you're keeping the tigers away.
Despite what the news shows - in the U.S. mass shootings happen all the time and go back decades. And that's not including nightly drive-bys in the major cities.
It's only certain ones, like school and church and night club shootings that make the headlines. Look up mass shootings in the United States, by year. I'll bet you never heard of most of them.
The failure in logic is yours and yours alone. This is a question of rights and you don't like this one any more than you like what others say at times.
No where in the 2nd does it say "musket" or "arms of the time period" anymore so that the 1st says "parchment only"
You really are a dim bulb. if your job isn't food service or manual labor, you really must suck at it.
PsyOps
Pixelated
It doesn't matter... YOU cannot be trusted with such lethal weapons. Only the government can be trusted with these weapons; even though history shows government is far less responsible in their use of such weapons. Even though you and I have clean criminal records, have had security clearances and law-respecting people we - THE PEOPLE - are a mentally-unfit bunch that must be controlled by the government. We are not to be trusted.
PsyOps
Pixelated
And to say they had no way of anticipating firearm technology would get to this point is like saying they were ignorant to the fact that prior to musket the only weapons that existed were swords and bows and arrows., and prior to that just the sword, and prior to that sling shots, and prior to that rocks...
Australia never had a constitution making Gun Ownership a Right
The highest rates of firearm related deaths occur in Honduras, Venezuela, Swaziland, Guatemala, and Jamaica.
This_person
Well-Known Member
You give Sap a lot of credit. More than I give him.