Justices agree on right to own guns

[Milton Bradley]

Quote by: Sonart Basketballs and skateboards are not incredibly dangerous weapons, Milton.

They are in the hands of idiots of the caliber of my neighbors.

Quote by: Sonart And in a nation where maybe half of it's young people can find India on a map, while simultaneously being trained and conditioned to violence and mayhem by the ubiquity of both guns and computer simulations like GTA, hell no Americans cannot be trusted with guns.

OK. Now that we have established that you cannot be reasoned with, and that you do expect me to suffer for other peoples shortcommings, I don't think there is much further to discuss.


In fact, I wonder why the Mods don't reprimand you for continuously posting that same non-argument over, and over again. It's just unsupported opinion, and the statistic sheet on which you base that opinion.

Quote by: Sonart And the chart I just showed you verifies that we can't.

The chart shows that "in your opinion, you can't".


Sorry, but my rights are not yours to forfeit. Feel free to hand over your guns.

Quote by: Sonart Interesting... why would that be? Criminals wouldn't have them, police wouldn't have them, no one would. Where's the nightmare?

The nightmare is the utopian fantasy that you have where your benevolent Nanny government is actually able to confiscate all firearms. It'll never happen. Then, only the criminals ( and that includes a government who would disarm it's populace ) have guns, and the nightmare begins.

Quote by: Sonart Jeez, let me count the ways... First off, if we're already one of the most violent, murderous nations on earth, how can you suggest that individuals are being protected?

I'm not. In fact, I'm arguing quite the opposite. I contend that the police cannot adequately protect me, therefore I have to protect myself. That's why I choose the gun. That's why he citizen has that option.


People here have a right to protect themselves, but it seems we have many soft individuals in this society who cannot step up, and shoulder the resonsibility that is required to live in a free society, so they seek to compromise the experiment in the name of lazyness, or perhaps the One World Government. ( Which camp are you in? )

Quote by: Sonart Second, as I keep trying to point out, on a per use basis, automobiles are quite safe relative to guns, while simultaneously serving as an incredibly valuable tool for both commerce and society, making travel within the world's third largest nation manageable. Guns just make us more violent because they make deadly violence so easy.

Says you, in your own arbitrary estimation. I see by the statistics, that many other people disagree, including many people in those other countries leading on the statistic sheet.


If the laws in the other nations are so attractive to you, why are you still here? Seriously. It cannot be easier to crusade against guns than it would be to move, and live in peace.

[Milton Bradley]

Quote by: Winter wind I'm just poking my head in but this is a crappy argument. No tazers don't work, but wait, swimming pools are just as lethal. Only a gun was meant to be lethal and only a gun's sole purpose is to be lethal.

One of the points continuously surfacing in these discussions is that some people wish to remove guns from society to protect children, yet swimming pools kill more children than guns each year since stats have been kept. Yet the is no cry to remove swimming pools.


Therefore it is safe to assume that the real agenda is not the protection of the children, but the removal of the firearm.

Quote by: Winter wind Also, you never addressed the data he presented.

What's to address. It's a compilation of statistics for a given year, and somebody elses opinion of what that data means. I can simply say I disagree, and I have.


I don't see that as a justification to remove guns from responsible citizens. Like Sonart, you wish to blanket punish everybody for the sins of a few.


I feel that the attempt to disarm people is so egregious that it is precisely people like yourself, that I fear, and people like you who are the real problem with this society at present.

[Gods_Mercenary]

Quote by: Milton Bradley Don't underestimate the power of the edged weapon at close range. I know many people without extensive combat training that can open a blade, and stab you in the wrist before you can cock, and discharge a firearm.

I was unarmed, rememeber, plus a person with training can take a cocked gun from a persons hand and have it pointed at them before they realize what happened.

[Sonart]

.

Quote by: Milton OK. Now that we have established that you cannot be reasoned with, and that you do expect me to suffer for other peoples shortcommings, I don't think there is much further to discuss.

Oh waaaah... I'm sure all the world applauds your magnificence and trustworthiness, and all of us wish we could be just like you. However, I suspect most laws and regulations came about because folks discovered that - alas - not everyone is as wonderful and trustworthy with extremely dangerous weapons as Milton Bradley.

Sorry about that.

Quote by: Milton It's just unsupported opinion, and the statistic sheet on which you base that opinion.

It's the 800 lb gorilla that you keep trying to ignore, Milton, just like you tried to ignore the FACT that -- based on the Constitution and Case Law -- you do NOT have an individual right to own guns.

So until you have a rational justification for why it's acceptable for the U.S. -- the supposed beacon of civilization -- to be so much more violent and dangerous than other modern - and not so modern - nations we claim to be so superior to, I have to assume that you simply place your own self indulgence, pleasure and theoretical politics ahead of the safety of your fellow citizens.

Quote by: Milton Sorry, but my rights are not yours to forfeit. Feel free to hand over your guns.

What rights? We've already explained how the NRA and everyone else has been lying to Americans for the past 70 years about your non-existent 'Right' to own deadly firearms.

Anecdotelly, I was immensely bemused a few weeks ago to watch a forum of TV pundits discussing the upcoming Court decision, and watching the lightbulbs go on as it dawned on each of them that for the last 70 years they HAVEN'T had the individual right to keep and bear arms, and trying to rationalize why the press has been so befuddled about reality for all these years.

I'm sorry if it bugs you that I figured out the obvious before everyone else did, but it is what it is.

Quote by: Milton The nightmare is the utopian fantasy that you have where your benevolent Nanny government is actually able to confiscate all firearms.

I defy you to point out anywhere that I've suggested government confiscation of firearms. I simply want it much more difficult to acquire them, with the hope that guns will be 'retired' faster than they are acquired, and the people will stop seeing them as massive dick extenders to be collected and played with, but rather as extremely dangerous weapons just as likely to harm their owners as anyone else.

Quote by: Milton Bradley Says you, in your own arbitrary estimation. I see by the statistics, that many other people disagree, including many people in those other countries leading on the statistic sheet.

What, that cars are more dangerous than guns? Horseshit. You can try to compare apples to bullfrogs and come up with twinkies all you want, but I've already done the exercise that PROVES that automobiles are operated at a rate tens, if not hundreds of thousands of times more often than firearms.

I'm sorry that your 'clever' comparisons have turned out to be just plain silly, but... well, they are.


.

[Gods_Mercenary]

I defy you to point out anywhere that I've suggested government confiscation of firearms. I simply want it much more difficult to acquire them, with the hope that guns will be 'retired' faster than they are acquired, and the people will stop seeing them as massive dick extenders to be collected and played with, but rather as extremely dangerous weapons just as likely to harm their owners as anyone else.

Retired? a good gun can be kept in service for a huge amount of time, close to unlimited if proper care and spare parts are available. Unless you're suggesting making gun components or materials from which gun components could be fashioned illegal, it seems a difficult undertaking.

[Milton Bradley]

Quote by: Sonart Oh waaaah... I'm sure all the world applauds your magnificence and trustworthiness, and all of us wish we could be just like you. However, I suspect most laws and regulations came about because folks discovered that - alas - not everyone is as wonderful and trustworthy with extremely dangerous weapons as Milton Bradley.

Sorry, I'm inclined to perform my civic duty, and be a responsible adult. ( The "cost of freedom", remember? ) Yet somehow, that is the position you choose to ridicule?


Well, I guess that says more about you, than it does about me.

Quote by: Sonart Sorry about that. It's the 800 lb gorilla that you keep trying to ignore, Milton, just like you tried to ignore the FACT that -- based on the Constitution and Case Law -- you do NOT have an individual right to own guns.

Nonsense. The 800 lb. gorilla is that pesky Second Amendment you're so fond of misrepresenting.

Quote by: Sonart So until you have a rational justification for why it's acceptable for the U.S. -- the supposed beacon of civilization -- to be so much more violent and dangerous than other modern - and not so modern - nations we claim to be so superior to, I have to assume that you simply place your own self indulgence, pleasure and theoretical politics ahead of the safety of your fellow citizens.

It's called the law.

Quote by: Sonart Anecdotelly, I was immensely bemused a few weeks ago to watch a forum of TV pundits discussing the upcoming Court decision, and watching the lightbulbs go on as it dawned on each of them that for the last 70 years they HAVEN'T had the individual right to keep and bear arms, and trying to rationalize why the press has been so befuddled about reality for all these years.

TV pundits are paid to not understand anything, or ank the right questions.

Quote by: Sonart I'm sorry if it bugs you that I figured out the obvious before everyone else did, but it is what it is.

Well, like I say, you're going to have a Hell of time defending an institution that allowed all the manufacture, and sales to occur for the last 200 plus years if it is found to be illegal.


How could you possibly justify supporting an organization that found all those other legal transgressions more important than allowing the manufacture, and sales of tens of millions of firearms?


Sounds like we need a War on Arms more than we need the War on Drugs. And if that's true, it looks like we need a War on Democrats, and Republicans more than any other thing I can think of. After all, they're the ones that let things spin oput of control to this level, and that's criminal in itself.

Quote by: Sonart I defy you to point out anywhere that I've suggested government confiscation of firearms. I simply want it much more difficult to acquire them, with the hope that guns will be 'retired' faster than they are acquired, and the people will stop seeing them as massive dick extenders to be collected and played with, but rather as extremely dangerous weapons just as likely to harm their owners as anyone else.

Oh, I see, so you can remain an armed hypocrite. That position works well for your elitist position. How convenient.

Quote by: Sonart What, that cars are more dangerous than guns? Horseshit. You can try to compare apples to bullfrogs and come up with twinkies all you want, but I've already done the exercise that PROVES that automobiles are operated at a rate tens, if not hundreds of thousands of times more often than firearms. I'm sorry that your 'clever' comparisons have turned out to be just plain silly, but... well, they are.

It's not a clever comparison on my part, it's a logical inconsistancy on your part.


Conveniently, since you never answer the meaty questions, but only select out a few choice questions, you've been able to weasle out of taking positions on so many aspects of the draconian crap you're pushing.


So answer...


If the justification is protection of the individual, then how do you arrive at the arbitrary decision that the number of deaths caused by cars is tolerable, yet the number of deaths cause by guns is not?


Hpw can you live with yourself knowing people are dying just trying to get to work in their automobiles?


How could you possibly advocate voting for people who belong to institutions that appoint SCOTUS Justices that have allowed tens of millions of illegal firearms to be manufactured, and sold right under their noses?


Do tell?

[Sonart]

.

Quote by: Milton Bradley Sorry, I'm inclined to perform my civic duty, and be a responsible adult. ( The "cost of freedom", remember? ) Yet somehow, that is the position you choose to ridicule? Well, I guess that says more about you, than it does about me.

Yes, I guess it does. Because I see gun ownership as a privilege that I must earn. No one 'gives' me the 'right' to own a deadly weapon. I heave to earn it, as does any "responsible adult". Just as I earn the privilege to own and drive that other "deadly weapon", a car.

Quote by: Milton Bradley Nonsense. The 800 lb. gorilla is that pesky Second Amendment you're so fond of misrepresenting.

Sorry Milton... my "misrepresentation" has been the unchallenged law of the land for the last 70 years. Until this past March.

Simply being part of the "World as Milton Bradley would Wish it" doesn't make it factual.

Quote by: Milton Bradley TV pundits are paid to not understand anything, or ask the right questions.

Indeed. Hence, the fact that they didn't know that Miller had been the standing case law precedent for the last 70 years, not the lie the NRA has been feeding America the whole time.

Quote by: Milton Bradley Oh, I see, so you can remain an armed hypocrite. That position works well for your elitist position. How convenient.

Since I haven't advocated banning or confiscating weapons, you're calling me a hypocrite is simply pathetic name calling. As I said before, I see gun ownership as a privilege to be earned, not some freebee right.

Quote by: Milton Bradley If the justification is protection of the individual, then how do you arrive at the arbitrary decision that the number of deaths caused by cars is tolerable, yet the number of deaths cause by guns is not?

Since you obviously don't comprehend basic mathematical probability, you certainly won't comprehend my answer, but here it is...

Given that a) we have to be a young adult, licensed and registered to own and operate automobiles, that b) automobiles are operated hundreds of millions of times a day in America versus the few dozen million times guns are operated a YEAR in America, and therefore automobiles, when operated correctly are hundreds of thousands of times safer than guns, which kill people when operated correctly, and that c) trucks and automobiles are an absolute necessity to the functioning of our nation, our economy and our society, which is built around roads and highways. Suddenly remove every truck and automobile from America and this country would grind to a halt. Suddenly remove every gun, a lot of gun nuts would be in tears at the loss of their toys, but little else would happen to the country.

.

[Milton Bradley]

Hmm, again, you don't answer the questions, but continue to spew opinion.


Thanks for playing.

[Winter wind]

Quote by: mb One of the points continuously surfacing in these discussions is that some people wish to remove guns from society to protect children, yet swimming pools kill more children than guns each year since stats have been kept. Yet the is no cry to remove swimming pools. Therefore it is safe to assume that the real agenda is not the protection of the children, but the removal of the firearm.

Again this isn't really a fair argument. One, gun crimes do not always equal homicide. Two this compares kids to adults. Three, if you really wanted to make this argument, you could only ask guns to be used only with proper supervision. Four, a swimming pool is rarely a weapon in a crime, accidental death is not the same as criminal action. Five a swimming pool is less deadly then a gun, it's just people realize a swimming pool is dangerous at all and they're more casual around one (you don't see random five year olds swinging a gun around).

What's to address. It's a compilation of statistics for a given year, and somebody elses opinion of what that data means. I can simply say I disagree, and I have.

but with no real support. I can just say "i disagree" but without support, the argument is meaningless.

I don't see that as a justification to remove guns from responsible citizens. Like Sonart, you wish to blanket punish everybody for the sins of a few.

It's not about punishment. It's about practicality. More gun control in most countries = less homicides.
I'm not angry or upset about it. Just realistic.

I feel that the attempt to disarm people is so egregious that it is precisely people like yourself, that I fear, and people like you who are the real problem with this society at present.

glad I could help.
Oh, and while this is fun, try not to get too personal, or you will begin arguing for the purpose of venting, which is fine, but it makes for bad debate.

[Milton Bradley]

Bad debate is when one side doesn't "get' what the other side is saying.


This thread is a good illustration of that fact. It's like ramming your head into a wall.

[Anmon]

America is gun crazy because of the Indians, its a hang over from the 17th, 18th and most of 19th century, when they were terrified of being butchered by them, so they naturally armed themselves to the teeth 24/7.
Cant say I blame them much either, those Indians weren't that smart, but they were pretty good at killing.

[Winter wind]

Quote by: mb Bad debate is when one side doesn't "get' what the other side is saying. This thread is a good illustration of that fact. It's like ramming your head into a wall.

At least you argued your point in this post.

Now if we could return to the debate...

Quote by: anmon Cant say I blame them much either, those Indians weren't that smart, but they were pretty good at killing.

well said.

But back to the gun thing, what's your take on the situation.

Quote by: boris Why would you want to own a handgun, or an uzi, or an assault rifle, unless you actually wanted to shoot someone? Does the fact that there are 200 million guns in America prove that America is a nation of murderers and psychotics? Yes.

The classic argument, and I haven't heard a proper counter argument to this in a while.

[Sonart]

.

Quote by: Anmon America is gun crazy because of the Indians, its a hang over from the 17th, 18th and most of 19th century, when they were terrified of being butchered by them, so they naturally armed themselves to the teeth 24/7. Cant say I blame them much either, those Indians weren't that smart, but they were pretty good at killing.

LOLOLOL!!!



Somebody's been watching too many westerns.

.

[Milton Bradley]

Register Communists ( Subversives ), not handguns.


P.S. I see Sonart is still not prepared to answer the tough questions, and I'm sure that says an awful lot about his position.

[Anmon]

Quote by: Winter wind well said. But back to the gun thing, what's your take on the situation.

cant be helped, Americans are in love with their guns, if you disarm the civilian population they will be at the mercy of the huge criminal and gang populations living their.

[Anmon]

Quote by: Sonart Somebodys been watching too many westerns.

Indians and whites were at each others throats in America long before the west buddy.
America was built on the gun, mainly because of the Indians, if they hadnt been there, the average white person wouldnt have felt the need to go around armed all the time.
Being armed all the time turned America into a gun culture, and so into a well armed modern day militaristic superpower.

[Gods_Mercenary]

Quote by: BorisTheFerret Why would you want to own a handgun, or an uzi, or an assault rifle, unless you actually wanted to shoot someone? Does the fact that there are 200 million guns in America prove that America is a nation of murderers and psychotics? Yes.

A gun is just as efficient a tool of defense as offense, and if you do not take reasonable steps to defend your body and your family yourself, I say you are the psychotic. There are in fact people who desire your possessions or even your life, and, yes, if necessary, I want to be able to shoot them.

[Sonart]

.

Quote by: Milton P.S. I see Sonart is still not prepared to answer the tough questions, and I'm sure that says an awful lot about his position.

I answered your idiot question, Milton, you just don't like the answer...

Once again, based on usage - the amount of time we spend driving versus the amount of time we spend using firearms - automobiles are thousands of times safer. That, combined the immense economic and social function automobiles serve as transportation makes the accidental deaths and injuries that occur due to traffic accidents vastly more acceptable than those due to firearms.

I'm sorry if it doesn't serve the little 'gotcha' role you'd intended, but there it is.

Was there some other "Tough" question you had in mind?

Quote by: Anmon Indians and whites were at each others throats in America long before the west buddy.

Far less than you like to imagine, "buddy". While occasional violence between whites and natives made for great storytelling, upwards of 90% of America's native population was wiped out by diseases brought by settlers, often long before they actually moved into former indian lands.

Quote by: Anmon America was built on the gun, mainly because of the Indians, if they hadnt been there, the average white person wouldnt have felt the need to go around armed all the time.

I've stated on many, many occasions that we are a gun culture because for half of its existence our nation was built on the expansion of boundless frontier wilderness, for which firearms played a vital role. And while guns certainly played their roles in subduing the various tribes our westward expansion overran, they were vastly more important simply for hunting and defense against natural predators than they were against Indians...

...to say nothing of other whites who used firearms to create their own 'frontier law'.

Quote by: Anmon Being armed all the time turned America into a gun culture, and so into a well armed modern day militaristic superpower.

So I've stated, many times. But once the wilderness was settled, the indians subdued, and our culture transformed from a lightly populated, wilderness bordering rural, agrarian society to a crowded, coast-to-coast industrialized, urban/suburban society, the need for personal firearms disappeared.

As to the "well armed modern day militaristic superpower"... that's exactly why the 2nd Amendment is meaningless.

Quote by: Gods_Mercenary A gun is just as efficient a tool of defense as offense, and if you do not take reasonable steps to defend your body and your family yourself, I say you are the psychotic. There are in fact people who desire your possessions or even your life, and, yes, if necessary, I want to be able to shoot them.

And yet somehow there are dozens of wealthy, peaceful, democratic nations around the globe that practice strict gun control, whose citizens are not armed to the teeth, and yet manage to survive with far fewer murders per capita than do Americans.

Vast populations of psychotics in those countries, do you suppose???

.

[Milton Bradley]

How could you possibly advocate voting for people who belong to institutions that appoint SCOTUS Justices that have allowed tens of millions of illegal firearms to be manufactured, and sold right under their noses?

[Gods_Mercenary]

And yet somehow there are dozens of wealthy, peaceful, democratic nations around the globe that practice strict gun control, whose citizens are not armed to the teeth, and yet manage to survive with far fewer murders per capita than do Americans. Vast populations of psychotics in those countries, do you suppose???

Perhaps, but that's not the point. Demographically, the U.S. would probably have more murders anyway, we're not exactly a Denmark or a Switzerland in terms of the people who inhabit the country. Hell, we're not even a France. The argument for having a gun in your home is not found in the "larger" picture, which is blury at best, considering no two nations are alike, but when the burly robber has kicked in your door and is threatening your life. In that case, I'd prefer even the chance of properly defending myself to the fate that awaits me in the however long it takes for police to respond. In this case, I find it unlikely that you'd find comfort in that you'd have been less likely to be murdered in a country without guns if you had lived.