Montana threatens to secede

[xPETEZx]

I don't see how it really matters how many are. As long as they are law abiding citizens it's their right to own a gun. If they use it illegally then they can have that right taken away.

 

So, by that rationale, you would be ok with some states not requiring you to take a driving test/lessons in order to drive a car? So long as the person wasn't doing anything illegal with the car??

[Coors]

Also what is the actual definition of trained? I took a general gun class, a safety class and the concealed class and test. I had to qualify on a range. I passed a background check. In my opinion that is trained and qualified.

 

Also unless there is a test afterwards most training would probably be a waste of time. Handling a gun is like driving a car in a way. If you've been doing it your whole life you're gonna be more likely to do it safely. The more experience you have the more comfortable you are gonna be doing it. Gun safety is a personal responsibility that comes with experience and mentoring/teaching.

[Coors]

So, by that rationale, you would be ok with some states not requiring you to take a driving test/lessons in order to drive a car? So long as the person wasn't doing anything illegal with the car??

 

You're trying to use Verran's argument....driving a car is not protected in the Constitution...

 

Driving on public streets is a priviledge that can be taken away a lot easier.

Edited May 6, 2009 by Raiderfan001

[Kash]

Ok first of all, this news is OLD. As in February 2008 old. This threat was made regarding the DC v. Heller case that was decided in June 2008, which upheld individual gun owners rights, but with reasonable restrictions. So for anybody who thinks the Second Amendment doesn't guarantee individual gun ownership, just stop. The Supreme Court has said that the right exists, so stop trying to make the argument that it doesn't. It's done, let's move on.

 

As for gun ownership statistics, all you have is a sensationalist video? Come on Clay, you should know better than to use a video by a liberal news source to back up a claim that gun ownership results in increased violence.

 

Here's a study for you. Journal of Quantitative Criminology. The impact of gun control and gun ownership levels on violence rates. Gary Kleck and E. Britt Patterson.

 

Findings indicate that (1) gun prevalence levels generally have no net positive effect on total violence rates, (2) homicide, gun assault, and rape rates increase gun prevalence, (3) gun control restrictions have no net effect on gun prevalence levels, and (4) most gun control restrictions generally have no net effect on violence rates.

 

Who does gun control hurt? The law abiding citizen. Not exactly the effect we were trying to go for.

 

Gun bans work in the abstract. However, they need to be universal, you can't have localized bans because criminals will simply import them from the outside. If we want a gun ban to work, we need to ban them across the world and then confiscate every one we come across when apprehending a criminal. However, I somehow don't see a multi-billion dollar industry simply keeling over.

[wevsspot]

The Second Amendment;

 

"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."

 

Is a sentence written in three parts, as it was meant, and you don't have to be a literary genius to understand it.

 

 

What is necessary? A well regulated militia

And what else? The right of the people to keep and bear arms

 

Why is it necessary? Being necessary to the security of a free State (notice the use of the word "state" here)

 

What does the 2nd Amendment say about the two things above? SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED

 

Our country is in a tailspin. I could write a book about why but i'll just point out a few things;

 

1. The principle or teacher can't spank children at school - that's worked out well, now we have pre-teen and teen children committing murder (where at? - schools)

 

2. The parent can't discipline or spank their children if they miss-behave - that's worked out well, we have an entire generation full of me first, serve myself only, i'm "entitled" to kids who have high self esteem but no sense of humility or what it means to put someone else before themselves - by the way prisons are full of those types of people

 

3. The majority of Americans are over taxed, after you pay sales taxes, property taxes, personal property taxes, state income taxes, federal income taxes, estate taxes, business taxes etc. many of us live on about 60% of what we actually earn in a year. Where does a lot of our hard earned tax money go? Pork barrel projects, the world bank, the UN, wars and the silk lined pockets of at least half of people we "elect" to public office.

 

And those are just a few things wrong with the United States of America. But I'm still proud to be an American. For all of you that care whether or not the Federal Government wants to whittle away at your rights......

 

Fortunately for us in District of Columbia v. Heller the Supreme Court of the United States held that the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution protects an individual's right to possess a firearm for private use. So at least for this go round we are safe, but God help us once Obama begins crafting his own Supreme Court for the future.

 

Have a gander at this scary piece of legislation;

 

http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h45/text

Edited May 6, 2009 by wevsspot

[ClayMeow]

Also unless there is a test afterwards most training would probably be a waste of time. Handling a gun is like driving a car in a way. If you've been doing it your whole life you're gonna be more likely to do it safely. The more experience you have the more comfortable you are gonna be doing it. Gun safety is a personal responsibility that comes with experience and mentoring/teaching.

But that's the point. Many people buy a gun and never train with it. They leave it lying around and expect to be able to shoot an intruder when the time comes. Like you said, it takes practice. Most people aren't going to be able to just pick up a gun and use it correctly (this isn't the movies). I've shot guns before, so I'm not saying this as a naive person that's never tried it. The first time I shot (pistols, assault rifle, shotgun), my friend (trained govt op) said he was impressed...that I was pretty good for my first time. Do I think I can defend myself with a gun if need be? I'd like to think so, but who knows. I'm sure I'd do better than most people that have never touched a gun before, but I most certainly don't have the skills as a trained professional.

 

The fact of the manner is, as I stated, most states don't even require you to have training. You can buy a gun without ever touching one previously. You guys claim it's your "right" to own a gun no matter what. I'd like to know where you think it states in the Constitution that regulations can't be in effect?

[LoArmistead]

What is Obama's reasoning for wanting to take away arms in the first place?

 

Control. Not gun control, or safety control, but life control. That's what gun bans were about in the 1700s, that's what they were about in the 1900s, and that's what they're about now.

[Nerm]

"They can have my gun when they pry it from my cold dead fingers"

[Coors]

You guys claim it's your "right" to own a gun no matter what. I'd like to know where you think it states in the Constitution that regulations can't be in effect?

 

Just like Kash mentioned just above. I'm not a legal buff but this is as far as i'm aware the latest ruling on gun ownership.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/District_of_Columbia_v._Heller

 

edit: I never said it couldn't be regulated...but banning handguns is not regulating them reasonably.

Edited May 6, 2009 by Raiderfan001

[ClayMeow]

Have a gander at this scary piece of legislation;

 

http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h45/text

I'd like to know what part of that you find scary? The fact that it's going to require you to pass a test and get a license? Oh no, how could our govt want only knowledgeable people handling firearms?! O THE HUMANITY!

[ClayMeow]

Just like Kash mentioned just above. I'm not a legal buff but this is as far as i'm aware the latest ruling on gun ownership.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/District_of_Columbia_v._Heller

 

edit: I never said it couldn't be regulated...but banning handguns is not regulating them reasonably.

Sorry, but that ruling did not ban regulations and restrictions. Read again.

[Bosco]

Control. Not gun control, or safety control, but life control. That's what gun bans were about in the 1700s, that's what they were about in the 1900s, and that's what they're about now.

Ahhh gotcha

 

I think he may want to look at the justice system first that might be a better place to start. <_>