SupaFunkyOrgangrinderSexy said:

so you're changing the words to make it say what you want. it doesn't say the right of a people as a militia, does it?

i quoted it exactly as written. it's referencing a militia and the individual.

sassybritches said:

I give in... shoot me

sassybritches said:

Why didn't it just make a blanket statement then? It references one in relation to the other. Back then a militia against the government probably would have been made of unorganized "individuals" i.e. "the people". Americans as "the people" will never be able to overthrow the American military with guns so the NRA has done a great job at changing the intent of that ammendment to suit it's need for greed.

Steadwood said:

SupaFunkyOrgangrinderSexy said:

supa, that question goes both ways? if the 2nd amendment was only to refer to militia groups, why not say, "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."

i know there was no national military . guess what? so did the people of the day. there would be no need to mention the right of the people because it would be a given. the reason the right of the people was included was specifically to state the people have a right to bear and keep arms.

sassybritches said:

my god. i actually agree with you on something

poor kids, all of them.

UK orgers, how many school shootings have you guys had since guns were banned there?

Steadwood said:

my god. i actually disagree with you on something.

better BELIEVE i will shoot a hostile intruder in my home.

XxAxX said:

see...even you have some sense about you!

XxAxX said:

I can't even get with your enthusiasm for guns

sassybritches said:

i thought the same thing about you but was too polite to post it

SupaFunkyOrgangrinderSexy said:

and i cannot understand for once second why you naively assume that fucktards with violent inclinations will just go away if guns were prohibited.

XxAxX said:

but you know? this website is redundant with discussions about the same topics ad nauseum.

we've already talked this subject to DEATH over in P & R.

i'm out

XxAxX said:

I don't believe that. AT. ALL. But I can see that flooding this country with as many guns as humanly possible leads to an awful lot of fucking bullshit. I mean hey, let's just celebrate this right with all the vigor in our beings and just make sure every single citizen has a gun with them, on them and at all times at their disposal.

.
[Edited 10/10/07 12:36pm]

evenstar said:

I'd like to know that answer.

sassybritches said:

what about the ones out side of school, they happen ALL the time

6 happened on a Sunday evening this past weekend

a couple months ago a couple kids shot and killed an icecream man infront of an old man and his grandaughter

there have been a number of other shootings involving the SAME AREA between then and now.

horatio said:

oh, we could go on about violent crime in general but i'm just astounded at the frequency with which these school shootings happen. i mean, everyone was just horrified when columbine happened. a mere 8 years later and we're not half surprised to see it happening regularly.

And to be clear, my hostility on this issue is not in individuals owning guns in their home for protection. Hell, I might even consider something like that at some point in my life. I know I have slept with a knife nearby in the past

My hostility on this issue stems from the overly enthusiastic support of those who support this right and then fight tooth and nail or don't believe in any regulation of guns and gun sales? I will never understand why there is such a need for guns to be sold, traded, manufactured and all that without any check on it. It should not be impossible for the average citizen to get a gun but they certainly shouldn't be able to just waltz in and get one without the manufacturer/seller/government knowing who is buying that gun.

sassybritches said:

these are all involving people under age

SupaFunkyOrgangrinderSexy said:

i don't have a problem with background checks. i don't have a problem with people who have violent crime or severe mental health issues in their past never being able to get a gun. a three day waiting period might not be long enough. heck, if you're in that much of a rush to get a gun i'm already worried about what your motivation is.

and why is there such an involved process for being able to drive, but anyone who passes a background check can own a gun without any training?

sassybritches said:

at some shooting ranges,which is where i figure you would shoot a gun if you are on the up and up, rent guns to shoot.

evenstar said:

well, more people in america are killed in automobile accidents each year than by guns.

horatio said:

its not economically smart to rent a un each time you go shooting. i mean, really, you should just buy and stop throwing money out. then there's hunting, and you would probably want to own a gun for that.