General discussion

NOW --- LET'S TALK A BIT ABOUT GUN CONTROL

I mentioned this above .. but let's bring it up again. Gun control. For decades the left has been eager to disarm the American people. Democrats and liberals have been dedicated to the idea that only government should have guns, that the people should totally and completely put their right of self defense to government. How would you like to have been one of the people in New Orleans who sat out the storm in their house, only to now find to now find predatory looters trying to come through the front door ... and no police help available. One shot through the door to take out that first looter and the rest would run. They're looking for safe targets, not homeowners with guns. And what about the hospitals? I'm almost dead certain that the rules in these hospitals forbade any employees from having guns on the premises. Now we hear about doctors and nurses moving patients to higher floors of hospitals while looters make their way upstairs. Do they wish they had guns now? How about that children's hospital that was under siege a few nights ago?

Now you know. In times of disaster and civil unrest the government isn't - can't be there to help you. You will, at least for some period of time, be on your own. You have a responsibility to your children, to your family members, to protect them. Are you up to it? Do you have a gun?


wow i wonder if a stun gun would help with all the looters?
we wouldnt want to hurt the scum would weHappy

just think about it
http://boortz.com/nuze/index.html

Discussion is locked
Follow
Reply to: NOW --- LET'S TALK A BIT ABOUT GUN CONTROL
PLEASE NOTE: Do not post advertisements, offensive materials, profanity, or personal attacks. Please remember to be considerate of other members. If you are new to the CNET Forums, please read our CNET Forums FAQ. All submitted content is subject to our Terms of Use.
Reporting: NOW --- LET'S TALK A BIT ABOUT GUN CONTROL
This post has been flagged and will be reviewed by our staff. Thank you for helping us maintain CNET's great community.
Sorry, there was a problem flagging this post. Please try again now or at a later time.
If you believe this post is offensive or violates the CNET Forums' Usage policies, you can report it below (this will not automatically remove the post). Once reported, our moderators will be notified and the post will be reviewed.
Comments
- Collapse -
We know you love England and Canada Rob. It's good that

you've found a haven to your liking. It would, however, be appreciated if you would stop trying to make the US like England or Canada. The American people want their freedom. They don't want government beaurocrats telling them what they may or may not do.

The idea behind the right to bear arms was so that the people could resist government tyranny. It was not the support of a militia. The need to resist tyranny entails the need to defend yourself. These two needs have not, and will not, change. It's about time you realized that.

- Collapse -
so that the people could resist government tyranny.

If the government is being a tyrant,

Can't you vote them out in the next election?

- Collapse -
and thats good

the free people are garunteed freedom to bare arms
you wait id fight

- Collapse -
Not if it's a tyranny JP. That's why Americans still have

guns. They don't want tyrants in charge of the country.

- Collapse -
(NT) (NT) Only if the tyrants permitted the elections
- Collapse -
If we relied on a vote, we would still be a British colony

like Canada.

- Collapse -
This just in

Canada is no longer a British Colony.

- Collapse -
(NT) (NT) You could have fooled me.
- Collapse -
Some are easier to fool than others ;)

The British are a US ally in Iraq, so I don't understand why it would be such a bad thing to be a British colony, Remember the President called UK ''our closest friend''.

Some are colonies, some are puppets and some are independent.

- Collapse -
A 20th Century reading of the Second Amendment, KP.

It was almost invariably viewed and written about as a defensive arrangement in the 19th Century. America had Britain to the north and the Indians to the West. The Second Amendment was about a militia and about protecting individual states from Washington, (hence the Civil War) not about overthrowing the elected authority there.

I assume Ed H will have some relevant reading on this issue.

Rob

- Collapse -
Wrong as usual Rob. The people had just been through

a war to throw off the tyranical reign of England. They were not about to see a new tyranny start up. The view you're describing has long since been discredited. If you knew more about the country, you would know that.

- Collapse -
its hard for foreinors to understand real freedom

you just have to explain it to them over and over and over ect.

- Collapse -
its hard for foreinors to understand real freedom

Would you please explain which ''real freedoms'' you, as an American citizen, possess that citizens of other countries, for example Canada, do not possess?

Or do citizens of the US enjoy any "extra" freedoms that Canadians do not enjoy?

Since many foreigners do not understand ''real freedom'' would you please explain, in as much detail as you can?

your own advice

- Collapse -
We have the freedom to:

Worship without fear of censorship or fines for the content of the preaching.

Keep and bear arms.

Make our own health care decisions.

for starters...

- Collapse -
So can you show me

where Canadians don't have those rights?

- Collapse -
(NT) (NT) Look at your own news.
- Collapse -
(NT) (NT) I guess you don't read or hear any Canadian news, so ..
- Collapse -
Matter of fact YES...
http://canadaonline.about.com/od/guncontrol/

Your "freedom" to bear arms is rather limited.

Your health care options are rather limited as well whiich is why many Canadians who can afford it come to the US for various treatments, operations, and medicines either unavailable or only available after extremely long waits in Canada.
http://www.fraserinstitute.ca/shared/readmore.asp?sNav=pb&id=394

Religious freedoms I won't get into but you might contemplate Muslims and court mediation before making too bald a claim as you did.
- Collapse -
if you need to ask

id suggest going to your local library and reading as if i told you you wouldnt beleave me anyway.

- Collapse -
Absolutely incorrect...

and all that is required for verification are the words of the Congress as they debated the Second Amendment (links previously provided) as well as the simple matter of bothering to read the words of those state delegations as they met to discuss and ratify the Constitution. Their words are what brought about the framind and passage of the Bill of Rights in answer to the concerns of the States.

The following link is a synopsis of the debates and you can verify accuracy through the Congressional Record (which was the previous link provided)
http://www.constitution.org/mil/militia_debate_1789.htm

This link is to the State Conventions on adopting the US Constitution.
http://www.constitution.org/elliot.htm

The Federalist Papers are another proof of the fabrication of your argument and can be found here among most other historical documents.
http://federalistpatriot.us/histdocs/

Do attempt to remember that American Law was based on British Law and the British Bill of Rights (which happens to provide "That the subjects which are Protestants may have arms for their defence suitable to their conditions and as allowed by law; " and I know I have linked you to Blackwell's Commentaries by St. Tucker which clarifys the matter as relates to arms being an individual right.

It wasn't until the mid 20th century that even liberals began claiming that the Second Amendment was about the collective right of a militia and attempting to claim that the use of people in the Second was different than its use elsewhere in the Constitution or Bill of Rights.

"In recent years it has been suggested that the Second Amendment protects the "collective" right of states to maintain militias, while it does not protect the right of "the people" to keep and bear arms. If anyone entertained this notion in the period during which the Constitution and Bill of Rights were debated and ratified, it remains one of the most closely guarded secrets of the eighteenth century, for no known writing surviving from the period between 1787 and 1791 state such a thesis."

The following from which the above quote came should be REQUIRED reading as well as the resources from which it draws.
http://www.constitution.org/cmt/alstyne_2nd.htm

- Collapse -
Locked in a safe......

Lez see now...what was that combination..to open the safe as he was trying to suppress the sound of intruders & his teenage daughter screaming in the next room.

- Collapse -
(NT) (NT) and his 5 year old son can't get the gun either
- Collapse -
(NT) (NT) meanwhile as they hold him down and rape his wife
- Collapse -
I may be mistaken

but I thought you kept your gun in a safe.

- Collapse -
He does but you are...

mistaken because like me and many other users he keeps those he doesn't keep ready to use locked in a safe. The other is in his personal control.

- Collapse -
some in the safe and the other "in his personal control"

So "always packing" (never out of possession) or locked up.

Do you think there is a difference between "ready to use" and "personal control"?

If a person is asleep and the gun is not locked up it cannot be in their "personal control"

- Collapse -
Do you have to be...

driving to be in personal control of your automobile?

Does your dog have to be on a leash attached to your arm for you to be in personal control?

Did your children have to be in straitjackets when shopping or eating out for you to be in personal control?

Proximity is often perfectly adequate (whether awake or asleep) and if you don't think I (who can't even hear loud noises) am not in personal control of my firearm even while sleeping you are welcome to attempt to take it away.

You may "sleep like the dead" but many of us learned better many long years ago (for health reasons you might say).

- Collapse -
LOL! Maybe so, But........

It is always ready to be in controlDevil

- Collapse -
well

try walking into my place when im asleep and uninvited jp, we will see how much i control my wepon of death.

be real sure im aware of my suroundings at any time.
and here if you enter my place i can use lethal force with no restrictions.

its easy to say call the cops, trust me i do when i can but by the time they can respond your either dead hurt and your famiallys worse off.

i use gun control if i point my gun at you relize your a dead man walking.
i shoot every week at the range.

and i carry where ever its legal.
and as i go to a resteraunt which serves alcahol i cant caryy in there so i have a gun safe in trunk is bolted to frame and i secure it there as soon as laws changed ill be carring where ever i am.

- Collapse -
ty ed but the people who don't know how to

use gun control means there a victim just waiting to die

CNET Forums