Bring your guns to DC

[BlackCat]

Originally posted by AAHZ
ANYWAYZ! right to bear arms gets a BIG

Well, what is your score ? How many criminals have you until now shot down with your gun ?

[OzzyKP]

Originally posted by Jon Miller
OzzyKP!

I was going to mellow my stance on gun control.. but you are right. In fact, I wonder at the legality and wisdom of limiting automatic rifles...

JM

Glad I could help.

[Dinner]

Originally posted by DanS
Don't need to be conservative to be resistant to novel interpretations of "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed."

Quoting out of context is always a rightwing favorite.

[ZEE]

Originally posted by BlackCat
Well, what is your score ? How many criminals have you until now shot down with your gun ?

FIRST of all a human life is NOT a "SCORE" or whatever you want to call it...

SECOND ive never shot ANYONE nor do i plan on it...

LASTLY the fact that i have a RIGHT to own a gun, among other rights, is just what just makes my country so damn great...
PIECE...

[Elok]

Originally posted by Spiffor
You guys are tiresome, treating your constitution as some holy scripture insteadof as a political text.

If it's in the constitution, it must be good!

I guess fundamentalism isn't only a religious phenomenon in the US...

It has its pluses and minuses. Bear in mind that our first republic has outlasted, what, your first through fourth? Or fifth? It creates stability, and can be interpreted to fit the times, or amended. Our attitude towards the Founders is rather dysfunctional (if their opinion was so precious to us, we certainly wouldn't be letting women vote, or granting dem injuns citizenship), but it's mostly a case of us refusing to confront the fact that we mean not "what would Jefferson, Washington, and Franklin want?" so much as "what do we want Jefferson et al to have wanted?" The document deserves respect, just for pragmatic rather than dogmatic reasons.

WRT the DC gun ban, there was something in the WaPo a while ago about Congress trying to overturn an existing handgun ban in DC over the objections of the citizens of DC, who overwhelmingly supported it (especially the police). There were a number of editorials about it. I'm fuzzy on the details because I didn't especially give a rat's arse at the time, having just moved nice and far away from DC. But this is a bit more complicated than just the same tired constitutional squabble, methinks.

[BlackCat]

Originally posted by AAHZ




FIRST of all a human life is NOT a "SCORE" or whatever you want to call it...

SECOND ive never shot ANYONE nor do i plan on it...

LASTLY the fact that i have a RIGHT to own a gun, among other rights, is just what just makes my country so damn great...
PIECE...

If you really belives in th last statement, I really feel sorry for you - not US as such, just you.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Elok
It has its pluses and minuses. Bear in mind that our first republic has outlasted, what, your first through fourth? Or fifth? It creates stability, and can be interpreted to fit the times, or amended. Our attitude towards the Founders is rather dysfunctional (if their opinion was so precious to us, we certainly wouldn't be letting women vote, or granting dem injuns citizenship), but it's mostly a case of us refusing to confront the fact that we mean not "what would Jefferson, Washington, and Franklin want?" so much as "what do we want Jefferson et al to have wanted?" The document deserves respect, just for pragmatic rather than dogmatic reasons.

I guess so, but in the case of gun laws, it's seriously dysfunctional.

[ZEE]

Originally posted by BlackCat
If you really belives in th last statement, I really feel sorry for you - not US as such, just you.

your sympathy is noted...

[Whoha]

Originally posted by Zkribbler


Nope.
Judges decide questions of law.
Juries decide questions of fact.
As a jury, you have to agree to follow the law.

beaten to the punch on jury nullification.

[Timexwatch]

I wonder if Dan and I could get a group Poly discount once the first gun stores start opening in DC....

[Elok]

Originally posted by Spiffor
I guess so, but in the case of gun laws, it's seriously dysfunctional.

In the case of gun laws, most definitely. The gun lobby isn't all-powerful, but it's got teeth. Personally, I favor strict control rather than outright banning, but the second amendment's a clear anachronism. Times have changed, and civilians with guns aren't worth all that much as a military force. Unless "arms" is interpreted to mean helicopter gunships, tanks, RPGs, mortars, airstrikes...if we want a militia, we'll give them their damned guns, and other equipment too.

[Elok]

Originally posted by Timexwatch
I wonder if Dan and I could get a group Poly discount once the first gun stores start opening in DC....

They were there all along, I assume. Only handguns were banned. This wasn't an infringement of the right to bear arms, just of the right to bear arms that can be shoved into a coat pocket and smuggled onto the Metro.

[Jon Miller]

Don't underestimate what an armed populace can do. Look at what is happening in Iraq. We are annoyed, and not by helicopters, tanks, and airstrikes.

JM

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by DanS
The justification is mostly out of date, but that doesn't change the clear-as-day dictum that "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed."

There's just very little wiggle-room here. I have little patience for sophistry on the subject.

I agree with you, but I don't see how any limitations are Constitutionally allowed given the second amendment.

How can you justify the ban on private citizens owning nuclear weapons?

[Kidlicious]

A six year old blew his head off with a sawed off shotgun today.