Here Is the Place, if any on this forum, for Gun Discussion

[vintagetoppsguy]

Originally Posted by packs

You're the only one talking about banning all guns. It has no place in the discussion, which is centered around banning the sales of assault weapons previously banned, while not restricting your access to other types of weapons. Obviously if you obtain a weapon illegally, you'd suffer the same consequences. So again, what is your point?

Ok, let me rephrase then...

Let's say Congress drafts a bill today that bans all assault weapons. The bill hits the president's desk tonight and he signs it into law. Tomorrow, the sell of assault weapons is banned.

Now, what do you do about the ones already in the hands of individuals? What is to keep those out of the hands of the bad guys?

[packs]

I'm not asking to be the person in charge of setting law or repercussions for breaking a law. I am advocating change. That's something you neither acknowledge nor understand. And once again, your theoretical and off base situations have nothing to do with the reality that anyone can waltz into a store today and buy an AR-15 unchecked. That AR-15 killed 14 people yesterday, a gun similar to it murdered children at Sandy Hook. Both were purchased legally. Enough is enough.

[vintagetoppsguy]

Originally Posted by packs

I'm not asking to be the person in charge of setting law or repercussions for breaking a law. I am advocating change. That's something you neither acknowledge nor understand. And once again, your theoretical and off base situations have nothing to do with the reality that anyone can waltz into a store today and buy an AR-15 unchecked.

Since your full name is not in your post as per board rules, you will henceforth be referred to as IDIOT. IDIOT, I acknowledge and understand the change you are advocating. You want to prevent anyone from waltzing into a store and buying an AR-15 unchecked. Correct, IDIOT? Yes, correct, so I do understand and acknowledge IDIOT's point.

So, IDIOT, an assault weapon ban would prevent that, would it not, IDIOT? Now, IDIOT, what about the ones that are already in the hands of individuals? Do we let them keep them? Do we confiscate them? What do we do about them, IDIOT?

IDIOT, if you want to continue this conversation, grow some balls and put your full name in your post. Quit hiding behind your keyboard, IDIOT.

[packs]

What do prior gun sales have to do with preventing future sales of the same gun? How are they related? I'm talking about limiting abilities to buy guns tomorrow, not trying to change the past. Nothing you're saying is on topic and as usual you have devolved into name calling. Classic move.

[vintagetoppsguy]

Originally Posted by packs

What do prior gun sales have to do with preventing future sales of the same gun? How are they related? I'm talking about limiting abilities to buy guns tomorrow, not trying to change the past. Nothing you're saying is on topic and as usual you have devolved into name calling. Classic move.

Full name in post, IDIOT.

[tschock]

Getting back to the original question:

Why does anyone need to own an assault rifle?

There is a simple answer for that, which is the foundation for the second amendment. To assist in the overthrow of a tyrannical government should it become necessary. What more of a reason does one need?

[Topps206]

Except one could argue we have had tyrannical governments and nothing has happened.

This is what the pro gun people want. Fear, fear and more fear. It's propaganda and there's many people with this country with a sickening bloodlust. The First Amendment has its limits, don't see why the Second shouldn't.

[tschock]

Originally Posted by Topps206

Except one could argue we have had tyrannical governments and nothing has happened.

One could, but it would be a silly argument. Equating what "could" happen with what "should" or "should not" happen.

Originally Posted by Topps206

This is what the pro gun people want. Fear, fear and more fear.

Are you talking pro-gun or anti-gun here? Seems "fear, fear, and more fear" are being preached by the gun regulators.

Originally Posted by Topps206

It's propaganda and there's many people with this country with a sickening bloodlust.

Emotional rhetoric much? So let me try. 'It's propaganda and there's many people with this country who would trade their freedom for security within a nanny state.'

Originally Posted by Topps206

The First Amendment has its limits, don't see why the Second shouldn't.

Exactly. But those First Amendment limits are on the ACTION, aren't they? So shouldn't the same limits apply to the Second Amendment?

[Topps206]

Originally Posted by tschock

One could, but it would be a silly argument. Equating what "could" happen with what "should" or "should not" happen.



Are you talking pro-gun or anti-gun here? Seems "fear, fear, and more fear" are being preached by the gun regulators.



Emotional rhetoric much? So let me try. 'It's propaganda and there's many people with this country who would trade their freedom for security within a nanny state.'



Exactly. But those First Amendment limits are on the ACTION, aren't they? So shouldn't the same limits apply to the Second Amendment?

From what I see, there's more fear from the pro gun crowd than than the anti-gun crowd.

People talk about government tyranny. Well...

John Adams: Alien and Sedition Act
Abraham Lincoln: Suspension of Habeas Corpus
Woodrow Wilson: Sedition Act of 1918
FDR: Can be considered a tyrant if you look at the Japanese internments.
George W. Bush: The left considered him a tyrant
Barack Obama: The right considers him a tyrant

Plus there's the espousing of the term judicial tyranny ever since the Obergefell/Hodges decision. Don't forget about the wiretapping and NSA spying.

There's talk of government tyranny as the reason for assault weapons. Yet there's been a lot of tyrannical behavior from our country's leaders the past 240 years. How many overthrows or uprisings were there?

You can hate me, you can call me despicable names and you can wish awful things on me, but I am anti-gun and that's not a stance I plan on changing.

[SAllen2556]

Fear does indeed drive the pro-gun crowd.

Fear of history repeating itself - take away the guns to more easily control the populous, as has happened throughout history. I would remind you that most people throughout history have not lived in freedom. The US is very unique.

Fear of the slippery slope. Ban assault rifles and what's next? The anti-gun crowd will not be satisfied with just a ban on assault rifles, they never have.

Fear of the Left who, inadvertently, limit freedom through attempts at doing what's best for all: health care, taxes, business regulations, education, welfare, and hell, even school lunches.

You can't legislate against evil. I hold no ill will toward the do-gooders, but they're terribly misguided in believing that they'll ever prevent evil from occurring. Assault weapons exist - the technology is here. You can't eliminate them any more than you can eliminate abortion or drugs.

We make people take classes and pass tests before they get behind the wheel of a car, maybe we can beef up the tests, I don't know. Better technology on the guns perhaps? Some way to prevent anyone but the owner of the gun from being able to use it?

I'm much more interested in the psychology of these people. What's in their heads? How did they become so screwed up? How do we find these people before they commit these evil acts?

[Topps206]

Originally Posted by SAllen2556

Fear does indeed drive the pro-gun crowd.

Fear of history repeating itself - take away the guns to more easily control the populous, as has happened throughout history. I would remind you that most people throughout history have not lived in freedom. The US is very unique.

Fear of the slippery slope. Ban assault rifles and what's next? The anti-gun crowd will not be satisfied with just a ban on assault rifles, they never have.

Fear of the Left who, inadvertently, limit freedom through attempts at doing what's best for all: health care, taxes, business regulations, education, welfare, and hell, even school lunches.

You can't legislate against evil. I hold no ill will toward the do-gooders, but they're terribly misguided in believing that they'll ever prevent evil from occurring. Assault weapons exist - the technology is here. You can't eliminate them any more than you can eliminate abortion or drugs.

We make people take classes and pass tests before they get behind the wheel of a car, maybe we can beef up the tests, I don't know. Better technology on the guns perhaps? Some way to prevent anyone but the owner of the gun from being able to use it?

I'm much more interested in the psychology of these people. What's in their heads? How did they become so screwed up? How do we find these people before they commit these evil acts?

Something has to change. You cannot keep things the way they are. Gun sales might spike, but they're not a deterrent, just like capital punishment doesn't stop murder in red states.

I feel that the notion of freedom in the United States is merely a mirage. If American supported freedom, they'd find alternative energy sources and not rely on Saudi Arabia, which has suppressed the freedoms of its citizens and committed numerous atrocities in human history. If we were for freedom, we didn't show it when we intervened in Latin American countries, ousted their leaders and supported dictators because it would help our own interests.

The right wants to lecture me on the Constitution, on the Second Amendment, well, allow me to lecture them on other aspects of Constitutional law.

.The religious freedom clause applies to people of all faiths, not just Christians. You have no legal or moral jurisdiction to ban Islam and to profile Muslims in this country.

.There is a separation of church and state in our Constitution. Those words verbatim are not mentioned, but it is implied. The freedom to practice any religion, or none at all. One cannot encroach on the other.

.Conservatives love the Constitution so much that they have discussed repealing the 14th amendment.

.Also repealing the 16th.

.Also repealing the 17th.

.No religious test shall be administered for office, yet it is on the books in certain state constitutions that an atheist like myself cannot run for office. Thankfully, I don't live in any of these states.

.Christianity is not established in our Constitution as a national religion, nor is this a Christian nation. There are more Christians here than any other faith, but it's not the official religion despite recent data indicating that conservatives are willing to scrap the First Amendment and turn this into a theocratic regime.

I understand that my anti-gun position is not popular with many. My point is that people on the right bring up the Second Amendment, yet they pick and they choose which parts of the Constitution they like to suit their narrative. They claim to love freedom, they claim to love the Constitution, yet I notice inconsistencies on their end.

[chaddurbin]

Originally Posted by tschock

One could, but it would be a silly argument. Equating what "could" happen with what "should" or "should not" happen.



Are you talking pro-gun or anti-gun here? Seems "fear, fear, and more fear" are being preached by the gun regulators.



Emotional rhetoric much? So let me try. 'It's propaganda and there's many people with this country who would trade their freedom for security within a nanny state.'



Exactly. But those First Amendment limits are on the ACTION, aren't they? So shouldn't the same limits apply to the Second Amendment?

most gun people sound like this to me...delusional, paranoid, and hard-headed. and they want more guns, kinda scary!

[tschock]

Originally Posted by Topps206

You can hate me, you can call me despicable names and you can wish awful things on me, but I am anti-gun and that's not a stance I plan on changing.

And that about sums it up, doesn't it? Open minded to a fault.

[tschock]

Originally Posted by Topps206

My point is that people on the right bring up the Second Amendment, yet they pick and they choose which parts of the Constitution they like to suit their narrative. They claim to love freedom, they claim to love the Constitution, yet I notice inconsistencies on their end.

Yes, they do. And thanks for proving your own point.

And FWIW, you have no idea on my position on the other items you're referring to. But please infer all you like.

[tschock]

Originally Posted by chaddurbin

most gun people sound like this to me...delusional, paranoid, and hard-headed. and they want more guns, kinda scary!

Sounds like the anti-gun crowd to me. An example?

"You can hate me, you can call me despicable names and you can wish awful things on me, but I am anti-gun and that's not a stance I plan on changing."

Nothing delusional, paranoid, or hard-headed there.

[Topps206]

Originally Posted by tschock

And that about sums it up, doesn't it? Open minded to a fault.

Are you open minded on my view at all?

[Topps206]

Originally Posted by tschock

Yes, they do. And thanks for proving your own point.

And FWIW, you have no idea on my position on the other items you're referring to. But please infer all you like.

I'm not referring to you specifically. I mean the right in general.

[vintagetoppsguy]

Originally Posted by Topps206

...nor is this a Christian nation.

Wow, your ignorance is appalling. If this isn't a Christian nation, then why is Christmas, a national holiday? What other religion has a day recognized as a national holiday? Just because you may choose not to celebrate Christmas, doesn't negate the fact our founding fathers declared it a federal holiday.

You talk about fear from the right, but the left has people so scared of the political correctness BS, that many people have even stopped saying Merry Christmas or have changed the name form Christmas to Holiday - Holiday Tree, Holiday Lights, Holiday Party.

No, it's Christmas, set aside for Christ. Again, you have the choice to celebrate it or not. There is no mandate to celebrate it, just as there is no mandate to pop fireworks on Independence Day. But to say this isn't a Christian nation when we have a federal holiday set aside for Christ is ignorant.

I didn't mean to get off topic, but when I see stupid crap I have to respond. Carry on with the gun talk.

[Topps206]

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy

Wow, your ignorance is appalling. If this isn't a Christian nation, then why is Christmas, a national holiday? What other religion has a day recognized as a national holiday? Just because you may choose not to celebrate Christmas, doesn't negate the fact our founding fathers declared it a federal holiday.

You talk about fear from the right, but the left has people so scared of the political correctness BS, that many people have even stopped saying Merry Christmas or have changed the name form Christmas to Holiday - Holiday Tree, Holiday Lights, Holiday Party.

No, it's Christmas, set aside for Christ. Again, you have the choice to celebrate it or not. There is no mandate to celebrate it, just as there is no mandate to pop fireworks on Independence Day. But to say this isn't a Christian nation when we have a federal holiday set aside for Christ is ignorant.

I didn't mean to get off topic, but when I see stupid crap I have to respond. Carry on with the gun talk.

You might want to check on who the founding fathers were considering that Christmas was not declared a federal holiday until 1870 when Grant was in office, only 94 years after the signing of the Declaration.

If Christ existed, scholarly research has suggested that he wasn't even born on December 25 but rather around the Summer Solstice. It is because Pagan holidays were celebrated on Dec. 25 that that's when Christmas was celebrated that day, too.

As someone who is liberal, I see both sides of the PC debate.

On one hand, some people need thicker skin and there are those who get offended over the slightest little thing that it's ridiculous.

On the other hand, I see videos and read articles that espouse hate and calls for violence and destruction against so many people and so many different regions. Pastors blame the attacked rather than the attacker, and it's not only people on the internet making inappropriate comments, it's talk show hosts and sometimes candidates.

This is not a Christian nation. There are more Christians in this country than anybody else, but we have the luxury of freedom of and freedom from religion. You cannot establish Christianity as the national religion, nor can you do it at the state level because the incorporation doctrine in the Fourteenth Amendment means the Bill of Rights must also be followed by the states.

If this were a Christian nation, the founders could've put it in the Constitution. Many a times over the 200+ years has our Constitution been amended. Not once is there a specific mention of Christ or Christianity.

[tschock]

Originally Posted by Topps206

Are you open minded on my view at all?

I'm quite open minded, otherwise I wouldn't have the views I have today. However the arguments for gun control are general not based in logic or human nature. Rather they seem to be more based on someone using one of their 3 wishes to wish for the genie back into the bottle.

As your views on conservatives were gross generalizations (and weren't directed at me), I will just leave you with one of mine. I find many self-proclaimed 'liberals' to be not at all liberal, but rather some of the most closed-minded people on the planet. One need only look to college campuses to see those with other views being shouted down rather than letting opposing views be heard. As hard headed as conservatives are, they will generally let opposing views be heard. To be clear, I am NOT referring to you but rather making a general observation.

Just one minor nit on religious freedom. That is specific to the FEDERAL level, but the states were not prohibited from establishing religious laws at a STATE level, and some did. Maryland for example gave deference to Catholics, and a number of other states for other religions (of which I can't remember specifics off-hand). And many states still have those types of laws on the books, though now being antiquated and not enforced. You're still not allowed to beat your mule on a Sunday in certain states.

[vintagetoppsguy]

Originally Posted by Topps206

You might want to check on who the founding fathers were considering that Christmas was not declared a federal holiday until 1870 when Grant was in office, only 94 years after the signing of the Declaration.

If Christ existed, scholarly research has suggested that he wasn't even born on December 25 but rather around the Summer Solstice. It is because Pagan holidays were celebrated on Dec. 25 that that's when Christmas was celebrated that day, too.

As someone who is liberal, I see both sides of the PC debate.

On one hand, some people need thicker skin and there are those who get offended over the slightest little thing that it's ridiculous.

On the other hand, I see videos and read articles that espouse hate and calls for violence and destruction against so many people and so many different regions. Pastors blame the attacked rather than the attacker, and it's not only people on the internet making inappropriate comments, it's talk show hosts and sometimes candidates.

This is not a Christian nation. There are more Christians in this country than anybody else, but we have the luxury of freedom of and freedom from religion. You cannot establish Christianity as the national religion, nor can you do it at the state level because the incorporation doctrine in the Fourteenth Amendment means the Bill of Rights must also be followed by the states.

If this were a Christian nation, the founders could've put it in the Constitution. Many a times over the 200+ years has our Constitution been amended. Not once is there a specific mention of Christ or Christianity.

Christ existed. To debate that is ridiculous. Even other major religions (Judaism, Islam) acknowledge he existed. Most scholars and even most atheists acknowledge he existed. Now, whether or not you choose to believe he was who he said he was is up to you.

There are many mentions of God throughout the important historical documents of the United States. There are Christian symbols and Christian scripture on many government buildings (many in Washington) throughout the United States. The same can't be said for other religions. We have it written on our currency. Many presidents have sworn their oath on the Bible. I could go on and on and on.

I look at my Calendar here at work and I see holidays of other religions, but they are not Federal Holidays - nothing for Judaism, nothing for Islam, nothing for Buddhism, etc. The Christian faith is the only faith with a holiday recognized by the United States government.

No, Christianity may not be the established religion but, when according to you own words, "There are more Christians in this country than anybody else" then I would say that makes us a Christian nation.

It would be like me saying that "We're not a nation of gun owners." Of course we're a nation of gun owners. You can choose not to own one just as you can choose not to practice Christianity, but overall, yes, we are a nation of gun owners.

If you want to continue this debate (or the one on guns), please put your full name in your post as required per board rules.

I'll leave you with this - the NYC skyline Christmas, 1956.

[vintagetoppsguy]

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy

There are Christian symbols and Christian scripture on many government buildings (many in Washington) throughout the United States. The same can't be said for other religions.

Oh, and if you like, we can have a study on the Biblical Scripture and other Christian inscriptions that are displayed on historic buildings and other monuments in Washington and throughout the US. You better equip yourself though because I certainly am.

[Leon]

The policy of the board is no politics and no religion discussions. If you are going to get into any kind of debate your full name really needs to be in your post. I suggest putting it in your signature with a period or hyphen so it won't be searchable. If you don't then you are going to be limited in what you can say on the board. Nothing personal, same rules for everyone. BTW, I don't kown about this being a Christian country but it is founded on Judeo-Christian principles.

Originally Posted by Topps206

You might want to check on who the founding fathers were considering that Christmas was not declared a federal holiday until 1870 when Grant was in office, only 94 years after the signing of the Declaration.

If Christ existed, scholarly research has suggested that he wasn't even born on December 25 but rather around the Summer Solstice. It is because Pagan holidays were celebrated on Dec. 25 that that's when Christmas was celebrated that day, too.

As someone who is liberal, I see both sides of the PC debate.

On one hand, some people need thicker skin and there are those who get offended over the slightest little thing that it's ridiculous.

On the other hand, I see videos and read articles that espouse hate and calls for violence and destruction against so many people and so many different regions. Pastors blame the attacked rather than the attacker, and it's not only people on the internet making inappropriate comments, it's talk show hosts and sometimes candidates.

This is not a Christian nation. There are more Christians in this country than anybody else, but we have the luxury of freedom of and freedom from religion. You cannot establish Christianity as the national religion, nor can you do it at the state level because the incorporation doctrine in the Fourteenth Amendment means the Bill of Rights must also be followed by the states.

If this were a Christian nation, the founders could've put it in the Constitution. Many a times over the 200+ years has our Constitution been amended. Not once is there a specific mention of Christ or Christianity.

[Joshchisox08]

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy

So an assault weapon ban would would eliminate these type shootings? Is that what you're saying? If that's not what you're saying, please explain your comment.

Assault weapons are banned in France too. That didn't stop the terrorists. 129 people dead.

They're banned in Norway as well. That didn't stop Breivik. 69 people dead.

Not sure why more people don't think like this. Getting rid of weapons is not going to stop a criminal.

If you just lock the door to your house surely there will be NObody breaking in will there? Ummm yeah a "door lock" will stop a thief like "gun control" will stop a criminal.

I also don't know about you guys but all this gun-control crap is starting to seem more and more like big-brother.