Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

4 year old shoots younger brother- intentionally!

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Originally posted by Sava
    absolutely they should charge the mother
    Who ever the hell left a loaded gun around two small children needs to be sterilized to prevent further contamination of the gene pool then they need to be locked away for the rest of their life where they'll have to toss salads for buba.
    Last edited by Dinner; March 14, 2005, 20:18.
    Try http://wordforge.net/index.php for discussion and debate.

    Comment


    • #47
      Being a non US cit. can you please in a few word tell what the first and second amendment states ?
      With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion.

      Steven Weinberg

      Comment


      • #48
        Originally posted by My Wife Hates CIV
        charge her with what?

        she has never harmed her kids... kid got a gun. Charge her, send her away??? now the other kids life is screwed and the state pays to raise this kid. yeah, that's what we need.
        A gun owner is responsible for safe guarding the gun, keeping it out of the reach of children, and supervising anyone who uses it. If you own a gun and you keep it loaded in a place where children can access it then you are utterly (I'd say criminally) liable.
        Try http://wordforge.net/index.php for discussion and debate.

        Comment


        • #49
          Originally posted by BlackCat
          Being a non US cit. can you please in a few word tell what the first and second amendment states ?
          Amendment I

          Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

          Amendment II

          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.
          Try http://wordforge.net/index.php for discussion and debate.

          Comment


          • #50
            Originally posted by BlackCat
            Being a non US cit. can you please in a few word tell what the first and second amendment states ?
            The first amendment guarentees the freedom of speech, assembly, the press and religion. The second amendment guarentees the right to bear arms.

            In recent years there have been a number of instances in which prominent gun control advocates have been murdered. In some cases the gun-nut perps have been apprehended, in others the crimes remain unsolved.
            "I say shoot'em all and let God sort it out in the end!

            Comment


            • #51
              Thanx both. Have I misunderstood something or are the second a rigth to bear arms against exterior enemies ? Or in other words, the amendment doesn't warrant a rigth to wear arms against US citizens ?
              With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion.

              Steven Weinberg

              Comment


              • #52
                Originally posted by BlackCat
                Thanx both. Have I misunderstood something or are the second a rigth to bear arms against exterior enemies ? Or in other words, the amendment doesn't warrant a rigth to wear arms against US citizens ?
                Nope, it only specifies the right to bear arms. It leaves the question of the identity of the victim completely up to the bearer. Man, now that's liberty.
                "I say shoot'em all and let God sort it out in the end!

                Comment


                • #53
                  That's the classic argument. The reasonable people understand the ammendment speaks about the need for "a well regulated militia" while the gun nuts insist that they have a constitutional right to own an M1A2 tank, RPGs, and rocket launchers.
                  Try http://wordforge.net/index.php for discussion and debate.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Irresponsible gun owners

                    They ruin it for everyone elese.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Just out of curiosity - what would it take to make a new amendment that specifies that the gunbearing rigth only was against external threats ?
                      With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion.

                      Steven Weinberg

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        It must be passed both houses of Congress by a 2/3 majority, be signed by the President, then ratified by 2/3 of the states.
                        Last edited by Dinner; March 14, 2005, 20:46.
                        Try http://wordforge.net/index.php for discussion and debate.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Originally posted by BlackCat
                          Thanx both. Have I misunderstood something or are the second a rigth to bear arms against exterior enemies ? Or in other words, the amendment doesn't warrant a rigth to wear arms against US citizens ?
                          The second ammendment has never been upheld in the way the gun rights advocates have interpreted it by the Supreme Court, who really has not said one way or the other on this issue, so your interpretation could be the correct one. It very well may only apply to a well regulated government approaved militia force.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Originally posted by Oerdin
                            It must be passed by both houses of Congress by a 2/3 majority, signed by the President, then ratified by 2/3 of the states.
                            Ouch !!! That make a stable system, but also makes it difficult to change short term desicions made under totally different circumstances.
                            With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion.

                            Steven Weinberg

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              The second ammendment has never been upheld in the way the gun rights advocates have interpreted it by the Supreme Court, who really has not said one way or the other on this issue, so your interpretation could be the correct one. It very well may only apply to a well regulated government approaved militia force.
                              Which is why many states get away with severly resricting gun priviliges. Which Im not against mind you, there are a lot of dumb asses who dont deserve to own a gun.

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Ok ok.. don't charge the kid.. yes I do realize he is not accountable because he didn't know what he was doing. He wanted the toys back but he had no idea a gun could end a life. ****ing mother... she sounds like the biggest imbecile there is alive.
                                For there is [another] kind of violence, slower but just as deadly, destructive as the shot or the bomb in the night. This is the violence of institutions -- indifference, inaction, and decay. This is the violence that afflicts the poor, that poisons relations between men because their skin has different colors. - Bobby Kennedy (Mindless Menance of Violence)

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X