US Supreme Court upholds individual right to gun ownership

[molly bloom]

Originally posted by Kidicious


Yes I did ... in school. These days I read things that are current. What about you?

I try not to limit myself to books by the Spice Girls and failed American politicians.

If you read only books recently published, then that may explain a lot about the content of your posts.

[molly bloom]

Originally posted by Kidicious

I can't remember the last time I read a book that was written before I was born. I do go back and review them occasionally.

This sentence could be taken on face value to mean that you have actually read all books written before you were born- that is, if you're 'reviewing' them.

You might profit from reading, well, just about anything by Michel de Montaigne, Jonathan Swift, Ambrose Bierce, Moses Maimonides....

and of course watching a Fritz Lang film- like, say 'Metropolis', 'The Big Heat' 'M', 'Beyond A Reasonable Doubt'....

[molly bloom]

If a guy is banging at my door at 2am in the morning, and is drunk and wasted, my first response is to let him in?

Ben 'Christian' Kenobi


Oh, ask yourself what would Jebus do ? He would say:

'Ye judge after the flesh; I judge no man. '

Yours in the fellowship of the Holy Spirit.

[self biased]

i'm not sure if this has been mentioned yet, but state laws vary rather widely when it comes to use of lethal force. in New York, for instance, it is wholly illegal to use lethal force in response to any threat, even if being threatened with lethal force.

as an example, if Mister Snuggles breaks into my home, points a gun in my face and tells me he's going to kill me, i become the aggressor if i shoot him first. a similar thing applies to other weapons as well.

where my point lay is this: while the federal government may grant us rights on owning firearms, actually using them to kill people is a whole other bag of apples.

[Elok]

IIRC Metropolis was a woodenly preachy class-struggle morality tale, so you'd probably like it, Kid. I did like Scarlet Street, though. Those are the only two FL films I've seen that I know of.

[Ben Kenobi]

Oh, ask yourself what would Jebus do ? He would say:

'Ye judge after the flesh; I judge no man. '

Yours in the fellowship of the Holy Spirit.

Great, you should take your own advice for once Molly.

[Ben Kenobi]

Tell him to piss off and call the police. Shooting him would be well out of order.

Depends on the drunk. If he thinks it's his house and that he's being locked out, then he's not going to be exactly easy to deal with.

I agree with you here that I would call the police, but I cannot see the property owner at fault here.

[Ben Kenobi]

So is this why you're in favour of gay marriage? I always thought you were opposed to it. That's funny.

Where is marriage an individual right enumerated in the constitution? I don't see it. The second amendment is there.

The problem with me, Ben, is I'm a thinker. I've got what the scientists refer to as a "brain" and I can use this "brain" to analyze a situation. I can gather statistics, sure, but that doesn't tell me enough. I need to go back to square one: what is a gun? Well, a gun is an instrument designed to kill. Then I think, "What purposes do guns have?".

Good start. I would say a gun has two legitimate purposes, self defense and hunting. Ergo, the question remains, they are built to kill what? Is it wrong to use a gun to kill animals?

So, one purpose is assisting in apprehending criminals or eliminating threats to public safety. That sounds like what we have law enforcement for. I think they should have guns.

Granted.

Another purpose is sport hunting. I'm personally opposed to that, but at this point I don't think rifles or even shotguns should be banned. Let people get their rocks off owning mother nature with technology they bought at the store. I think they're pathetic, but that's their business.

That is their right.

But what about hand guns? Handguns are not for hunting. Handguns are for concealing from other people and for shooting other people with the intent to kill.

They are for self-defense. That is a legitimate use of a handgun.

Why should citizens have a device whose only purpose is to kill other people, when killing other people is a crime?

And everyone who is shot by a handgun dies? This is a good question. Handguns are useful for self defense.

Fundamentally, any intelligent person should realize this is not conducive to lowering crime rates and protecting public safety.

It's a crime now to shoot someone who is a trespasser?

gun advocates such as yourself would find excuses -- "oh, the socioeconomic status changed", etc. Nothing would ever satisfy your requirement, which is exactly how you want it.

I don't own a gun. I'm a rights advocate. I believe people have a right to own a gun for the purposes of self defense and hunting, even as I will never own one myself.

I also think the country would be worse off if we allowed citizens to use handguns.

Handguns are not banned here in Canada. Why do you feel the country would be better off without them?

Whether you don't mind that tens of thousands of people are dying every year from handguns

LIE. In what? The US? Try 8k, not 'tens of thousands'.

http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius_04/offenses_reported/violent_crime/murder.html

when they absolutely would not all be dying without them is your problem and rests on your conscience. I would say that a true Christian with true Christian morals should be opposed to handguns since all they do is kill.

Hmm. Considering I am a pacifist, that's an odd argument to make. Where does Christ say "guns are evil?"

I would dispute that you could eliminate murder by banning handguns.

I do find it funny from that respect -- here I am, an anti-religion crusader who also happens to be homosexual is probably representing more of God's wishes than you are, since you seem to not mind weapons of murder in your hands or the hands of those around you.

Provide a biblical quote mandating the banning of guns, and I'll believe you.

[Dauphin]

After Australia and England and Wales, the highest prevalence of crime was in Holland (25 percent), Sweden (25 percent) and Canada (24 percent).

What kind of crimes are we discussing here? If it's all crime, can you really compare vandalism, theft and fraud with murder, rape and assault in one all encompassing statistic? And are the metrics even the same - what does 25% actually mean?

[Agathon]

Originally posted by Dauphin

After Australia and England and Wales, the highest prevalence of crime was in Holland (25 percent), Sweden (25 percent) and Canada (24 percent).

What kind of crimes are we discussing here? If it's all crime, can you really compare vandalism, theft and fraud with murder, rape and assault in one all encompassing statistic? And are the metrics even the same - what does 25% actually mean?

I agree. It isn't fair. For example, if you take out all the instances of sheep molestation, the Australian crime rate is halved!!

[DinoDoc]

How does it change the NZ crime rate?

[BlackCat]

In NZ it's the sheeps that molest humans and that is not a crime

[Asher]

Originally posted by molly bloom


Yes there is, but you're simply not up to the task of seeing what it might be.

After all, you litter your posts with the ghastly usage:

'off of'.


Ugh, if only there were some equivalent of an hermetically sealed grammatical environment- even isolating it like that just doesn't seem harsh enough.

Sorry, bud. You're wrong here. You might think there's stylistic issues with it, but from a syntactical punctuation perspective there is nothing wrong with it.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
Where is marriage an individual right enumerated in the constitution? I don't see it. The second amendment is there.

Oh, **** off, we're not having this discussion again. You're too stupid and stubborn to understand any arguments made contrary to it.

That is their right.

It's funny how you think sport hunting is a right, but not gay marriage. Neither are explicitly in the constitution or Bill of Rights.

They are for self-defense. That is a legitimate use of a handgun.

That's the point up for discussion, so stating your argument again doesn't validate it. I don't think shooting people with a lethal device is valid for self-defense. You do. You're Christian. I'm not. Work that one out, because I can't.

And everyone who is shot by a handgun dies?

It is FAR more lethal than a knife, for instance.

It's a crime now to shoot someone who is a trespasser?

It very much should be. It is in some states, and I know it's illegal in Canada.

I don't own a gun. I'm a rights advocate.

You're a rights advocate that wants to ensure gays don't have the same right to marry their lover. You're a hypocrit.

Handguns are not banned here in Canada. Why do you feel the country would be better off without them?

Because there's still excessive violence with handguns. Especially in Toronto and youth.

LIE. In what? The US? Try 8k, not 'tens of thousands'.

http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius_04/offen...me/murder.html

Sorry, bud, you are lying. It's clear you couldn't read my post, yet again. Look up how many people committed suicide with a gun, sum the total, and tell me what I said was a lie.

Hmm. Considering I am a pacifist, that's an odd argument to make. Where does Christ say "guns are evil?"

I'm pretty sure Christ frowns upon inflicting damage on other people with the intent to kill. But what the **** do I know about that, you're the hardcore Christian who doesn't care if tools for murder are in everyone's hand in the country.

I would dispute that you could eliminate murder by banning handguns.

Again, Ben, no one has said that. Please ****ing do us the courtesy of reading what is said. All you ever ****ing do is put up strawmen.

Provide a biblical quote mandating the banning of guns, and I'll believe you.

You're so ****ing stupid. Guns predate the bible, so obviously they're not there. A disciple of Christ may consider the fact that the bible frowns upon murder to be a hint that maybe Christ would not be appreciate of his followers using tools of murder on other people. Just a thought.

[Elok]

Originally posted by Mr Snuggles
Guns predate the bible, so obviously they're not there.

Just to be annoying, I'm going to go ahead and quote this before you can edit it to read correctly. Mind you, I would probably type funny too, after for so long. You have my sympathies.