Effective Regulation

[Metachrosis]

 

[Metachrosis]

 

[JColt]

 

[Metachrosis]

Thank God for RETIREMENT!!
Former Seattle Police Chief Norm Stamper believe the Second Amendment should be removed from the Bill of Rights and replaced with legislation “that makes sense for today’s world, not the world that existed at the time of the drafting of the Constitution and certainly the Bill of Rights.” Mr. Stamper’s comment underscores widespread ignorance of the Constitution and its philosophical underpinnings.
At the time of the Constitution’s drafting, it was generally accepted that an individual had a right to protect himself, his family and property. “Among the natural rights of the colonists are these: first, a right to life, secondly to liberty, thirdly to property; together with the right to defend them in the best manner they can,” said Patrick Henry.
The Second Amendment was not created for that purpose or to establish a right to hunt – it was established as a bulwark against government tyranny.
“Americans [have] the right and advantage of being armed — unlike citizens of other countries whose governments are afraid to trust people with arms,” wrote James Madison.
“The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government,” said Thomas Jefferson.
But in today’s domesticated and metrosexualized world, the idea that citizens may have to protect themselves against government tyranny is almost completely lost.
Mr. Stamper’s illogical argument about firearms made during an interview with AOL-Huffington Post is simply more evidence that the principles behind the Constitution, the Bill of Rights and the Declaration of Independence are almost completely lost.


http://www.infowars.com/former-seattle-police-chief-demands-repeal-of-second-amendment/

 

[snowgyre]

While largely I agree with you, Tommy, our forefathers did not live in the era of automatic weapons with hundred-bullet clips. It was a little harder for the criminally insane to mass murder people (not to mention children) with flintlocks.

 

[hadenglock]

 

[hadenglock]

Is it me or are we kind of late on this subject in human life? Violence is something that humans have been dealing with for their entire existence. This is nothing new to me, dont get me wrong i pay my respects to those who have passed and my sympathy goes to their loved ones. I think people live on fear too much to realize that life can be better than this if you just let it go, stop thinking about how your neighbor may kill you tomorrow, or how your government is going to take away all of your freedoms (which they've been doing now for the past couple decades now anyways). People keep sacrificing freedom for safety, then when they realize they're now living in a different world, they still ask "what happened?" People are always worrying about the "what if" rather than the "what now".

 

[Metachrosis]

Im not a social media whore so REDDIT or whatever it is escapes me

 

[GMTIRRILL]

i am all for the 2nd amendment but honestly why do people need automatic rifles and heavy weapons please answer that for me? as for the pic of timonthy mcvey he used a bomb we all know that but right now we have mentally unstable people getting these weapons and killing people and children. i really do not believe the families of the newton cn school shooting give a damn about what has happened in the past all they know is what took they're children away and ended they're young lifes. In closing there does need to be harder gun laws in the united states so these types of tragidy are fewer and far between....

 

[Lucille]

i am all for the 2nd amendment but honestly why do people need automatic rifles and heavy weapons please answer that for me? as for the pic of timonthy mcvey he used a bomb we all know that but right now we have mentally unstable people getting these weapons and killing people and children. i really do not believe the families of the newton cn school shooting give a damn about what has happened in the past all they know is what took they're children away and ended they're young lifes. In closing there does need to be harder gun laws in the united states so these types of tragidy are fewer and far between....

Gordon, I love children, and would never want them to be harmed by being shot. This was a terrible tragedy.
I am writing from the point of view of a Texan. I believe that the proximity if Texas to Mexico and the drug cartels and their arsenals would make a mockery of any attempted legislation to keep these kinds of weapons out of Texas in the name of safety.
The cartels and their members who are frequent visitors into Texas are certainly going to have the forbidden weapons. And our own government will of course continue to have these kinds of weapons. Remember, our Constitution was not written to protect us from crazy people, it was written to protect us from government oppression.
There are no easy answers, I love kids and I grieve with those parents. We need to think this all through carefully, whatever legislation might be passed in the near future may possibly have far reaching consequences that may weaken our Constitution.
I want all children to be safe- safe from being murdered by guns, and safe from governments and criminals that sometimes do not have their best interests in mind.

 

[WebSlave]

While largely I agree with you, Tommy, our forefathers did not live in the era of automatic weapons with hundred-bullet clips. It was a little harder for the criminally insane to mass murder people (not to mention children) with flintlocks.

Actually, during the time of our forefathers, and citizen of the USA could own ANY weapon that the government had at it's disposal. Cannon, war ships, explosives, everything. The POINT of the Second Amendment hasn't changed over time. But of course, I guess it is reasonable to assume that the government doesn't like much the REAON behind the Second Amendment, and would feel a whole lot more comfortable if it wasn't there.

If you hear of atrocities being committed in other countries that are initiated by their government, and find yourself thinking "That can't happen here", take a moment and think WHY you are having that thought. An unarmed populace is a COMPLIANT populace, or else.

 

[WebSlave]

i am all for the 2nd amendment but honestly why do people need automatic rifles and heavy weapons please answer that for me? as for the pic of timonthy mcvey he used a bomb we all know that but right now we have mentally unstable people getting these weapons and killing people and children. i really do not believe the families of the newton cn school shooting give a damn about what has happened in the past all they know is what took they're children away and ended they're young lifes. In closing there does need to be harder gun laws in the united states so these types of tragidy are fewer and far between....

So, how many laws did that guy break in the process of his slaughter? Those laws weren't enough? How do you plan on making it tougher for closet whackos to obtain weapons without taking away this freedom from those people who do not engage in such activities? Or does society simply need to be reduced to a lowest common denominator in everything so everyone can feel all safe and protected, no matter what rights get trampled in the process? Do fast cars scare you? Ban them! How about vicious dogs? Kill them! How many kids get killed in swimming pools every year? Fill them ALL in! Kids falling out of trees they climb a problem? Cut them ALL down! And what about those whackos? Shouldn't everyone have to undergo a completely psychiatric evaluation every year to make certain everyone is sailing on an even keel? Or how about assigning a cop to each and every citizen to make SURE they can't do hurtful things to others?

Sorry, but just the idea of trying to rubber baby buggy bumper this entire planet is just a completely foolish concept. If you want complete safety and security, that would be nearly impossible to do without giving up completely any freedom you have to go anywhere that you could possibly get hurt and do anything you could possibly by. That's freedom? Losing your freedom is worth your feeling comfy and not scared of what others may do in that Utopia you envision?

Thanks, not for me. I prefer the freedom to make my own choices, be responsible for my own safety, and take my chances concerning what others may try to do around me. Few things would scare me more than to be in a completely "gun free" world.

 

[JColt]

Too many mental cases on streets and in prisons when they shut down mental wards in the 80's and lowered mental healh provisions in health care. Maybe if they made a law where someone uses your weapon to kill an innocent person you get same sentance.

 

[Lucille]

Maybe if they made a law where someone uses your weapon to kill an innocent person you get same sentance.

So Joe, if someone breaks into my home, steals my gun, commits murder with it, you are OK with ME spending life in prison?

 

[JColt]

Im not a social media whore so REDDIT or whatever it is escapes me

All those pics you posted are from social media.

 

[JColt]

So Joe, if someone breaks into my home, steals my gun, commits murder with it, you are OK with ME spending life in prison?

Nope. But if your relatives do you should.

 

[Lucille]

Nope. But if your relatives do you should.

Really? If they break in the same way a thief breaks in, take my gun, I have to be responsible for the relative but not for the stranger? How does that make sense?

 

[JColt]

I should have stated that better. If you are negligent and someone uses your weapon to go on a killing spree because of easy and negligent. Access than you should be charged.

 

[snowgyre]

Actually, during the time of our forefathers, and citizen of the USA could own ANY weapon that the government had at it's disposal. Cannon, war ships, explosives, everything. The POINT of the Second Amendment hasn't changed over time. But of course, I guess it is reasonable to assume that the government doesn't like much the REAON behind the Second Amendment, and would feel a whole lot more comfortable if it wasn't there.

If you hear of atrocities being committed in other countries that are initiated by their government, and find yourself thinking "That can't happen here", take a moment and think WHY you are having that thought. An unarmed populace is a COMPLIANT populace, or else.

I'm not arguing for an unarmed populace. I own my fair share of guns. I support the second amendment. I come from a military family. However, I do think that it's far too easy to purchase some of these weapons with absolutely no checks whatsoever. It's actually easier and faster for me to go purchase an automatic weapon than to purchase a car.

I don't think there's any clearcut, easy answer to this. If we tried to keep track of the crazies, that would be a violation of privacy. If we tried to restrict ownership of weapons (in general), that would be a violation of the second amendment. Where do we draw the line?

I agree, legislation isn't always the right answer. As the number of people on the planet goes up, the more we're going to see certain privileges get stripped away. It's just the way it goes. We're projected to have nine billion people on the planet by 2050. Quality of life goes down as population goes up. Simple population dynamics, really. We can get away with more junk if the populace is able to control its crazies, and we're clearly failing at that.

 

[JColt]

Just an example. Years ago I had a friend who had 2 guns. Both hidden but his 2 boys knew where they are at. The older boy was a sketchy turf. I told my friend he should lock them up. He told me his boys would never touch. Months later kid gets caught with one at school. Luckily he just wanted to show it off. Had he killed someone I would have wanted the dad to pay more than getting sued.