Search
 
 

Display results as :
 


Rechercher Advanced Search

Latest topics
» Design of the Mound System of Waste Water Treatment
gun control EmptySat Oct 22, 2011 12:07 am by HallettStan

» Big Brothers Big Sisters- Recognition for Accountability
gun control EmptyWed May 11, 2011 4:10 am by DONALD C

» Dedicated to Energy
gun control EmptyThu Apr 08, 2010 6:51 am by shulink

» Rest In Peace . . .
gun control EmptySun Jul 19, 2009 3:09 pm by 89whiteandnerdy

» American Revolution - Biblical?
gun control EmptyThu Jul 09, 2009 2:06 pm by BrianEschen

» Is Slavery Wrong? Why or why not.
gun control EmptyThu Jul 09, 2009 1:51 pm by BrianEschen

» Patriot Act
gun control EmptyTue Jul 07, 2009 11:19 am by YoungStonewall

» God is Just
gun control EmptyMon Apr 06, 2009 1:13 am by CheeseKing

» Questioning More "Facts" From American History
gun control EmptyFri Apr 03, 2009 7:59 pm by BrianEschen

Navigation
 Portal
 Index
 Memberlist
 Profile
 FAQ
 Search

gun control

Page 1 of 2 1, 2  Next

Go down

gun control Empty gun control

Post by 89whiteandnerdy on Tue Dec 04, 2007 12:02 am

2nd Amendment to the Constitution: The Right to Bear Arms
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.

This seems pretty straightforward to me. What argument do the gun control supporters have that would overpower this? Why do they think they are right and can win?
89whiteandnerdy
89whiteandnerdy
Senior Moderator
Senior Moderator

Posts : 216
Join date : 2007-11-30
Age : 30
Location : North Carolina

View user profile http://capcc.forumotion.com

Back to top Go down

gun control Empty Re: gun control

Post by CheeseKing on Tue Dec 04, 2007 7:42 pm

They simply discount the Constitution and resort to methods such the hegal dialectic and push and make us compromise, giving up one type of gun, then another. Banning AK47s, later SKs, then soon 45s, etc. They win if we compromise. Never compromise.
CheeseKing
CheeseKing
Moderator
Moderator

Posts : 175
Join date : 2007-12-01
Age : 30
Location : California

View user profile https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=631165504

Back to top Go down

gun control Empty Re: gun control

Post by 89whiteandnerdy on Tue Dec 04, 2007 10:44 pm

yup, you're probably right. And yes, compromise means loss. It's happened way too many times in history.

_________________
J. Tillett
Forum Moderator

"Praise the Lord and pass the ammunition." -Howell M. Forgy, chaplain on a U.S. cruiser, Pearl Harbor, 12/7/41
89whiteandnerdy
89whiteandnerdy
Senior Moderator
Senior Moderator

Posts : 216
Join date : 2007-11-30
Age : 30
Location : North Carolina

View user profile http://capcc.forumotion.com

Back to top Go down

gun control Empty Re: gun control

Post by addo1 on Fri Dec 07, 2007 11:24 am

We have earned this right. We should keep it. Many lives have been shed for freedom, we need to keep our dear freedom. We need to not abuse our freedom though. Hillary is working on taking away this freedom from us. Dont let that happen, so help us God.
addo1
addo1
Moderator
Moderator

Posts : 60
Join date : 2007-12-07
Location : Rockwall, Texas

View user profile http://captoday.forumotion.com

Back to top Go down

gun control Empty Re: gun control

Post by YoungStonewall on Sun Dec 09, 2007 10:57 pm

The 2nd Amendment was intended to allow the general populace to remain armed as well as or better than the government controlled military.

This was intended to deter any foreign invaders and to insure the central government and state governments would never even dream of any form of tyranny.

All forms of weapons should be available to anyone who has the money and desire to own them.

However our current societal state of affairs, and lack of personal responsibility would make this extremely unwise to implement today.

YoungStonewall


Last edited by on Tue Dec 18, 2007 10:41 am; edited 1 time in total
YoungStonewall
YoungStonewall
High Lord Protector Against Sanity
High Lord Protector Against Sanity

Posts : 194
Join date : 2007-12-09
Age : 36
Location : I have gone to find myself. If I should come back before I return...keep me here.

View user profile

Back to top Go down

gun control Empty Re: gun control

Post by Legolas Greenleaf on Tue Dec 18, 2007 12:53 am

What do you think of permits? Is this a good part time solution?
Legolas Greenleaf
Legolas Greenleaf
Experienced Contributor
Experienced Contributor

Posts : 199
Join date : 2007-12-16
Age : 29
Location : North Carolina

View user profile

Back to top Go down

gun control Empty Re: gun control

Post by BrianEschen on Tue Dec 18, 2007 1:53 am

God commands all Christians to be well-armed and trained. flower
BrianEschen
BrianEschen
Experienced Contributor
Experienced Contributor

Posts : 192
Join date : 2007-12-10

View user profile

Back to top Go down

gun control Empty Re: gun control

Post by ElizabethBennet on Tue Dec 18, 2007 11:52 am

Do you think that goes for women, too? Wink

The Constitution clearly states our right to bear arms - I think gun control supporters are fighting a loosing battle.
ElizabethBennet
ElizabethBennet
Experienced Contributor
Experienced Contributor

Posts : 146
Join date : 2007-12-07
Age : 28
Location : North Carolina

View user profile http://divine-deposits.blogspot.com/

Back to top Go down

gun control Empty Re: gun control

Post by TheWylff on Tue Dec 18, 2007 1:10 pm

Just because God commands us to "be well armed and trained" doesn't mean we have to learn karate and buy a gun. I have no intention, whatsoever, of ever owning a modern firearm, ever. Period. That's not to say I can't use my fists or a mediaeval knife.
TheWylff
TheWylff
Experienced Contributor
Experienced Contributor

Posts : 133
Join date : 2007-12-11
Location : Talamh Duine, Mainland, Highland Kyndar region

View user profile http://www.fidelitybiblekits.com/theedp

Back to top Go down

gun control Empty Re: gun control

Post by 89whiteandnerdy on Tue Jan 15, 2008 2:20 pm

I got this off the NRA web site, any comments? They seem to have a good idea of what we're up against and the history of the issue.

The Second Amendment

The Second Amendment guarantees: "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."

This guarantees a citizen's right to keep and bear arms for personal defense. The revolutionary experience caused our forebears to address a second concern -- the ability of Americans to maintain a citizen militia. The Founding Fathers trusted an armed citizenry as the best safeguard against the possibility of a tyrannical government.

James Madison, author of the Second Amendment, wrote that Americans had "the advantage of being armed," that was lacking in other nations, where "the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms." Patrick Henry proclaimed the "great object is that every man be armed. . . . Everyone who is able may have a gun." The Second Amendment was then, as it is today, about freedom and the means to protect it.

In United States v. Miller, 307 U.S. 174 (1939), the Supreme Court refused to take judicial notice that a short-barreled shotgun was useful for militia purposes. Nowhere did the court hold that an individual does not have a right to keep and bear arms. In United States v. Gomez, 81 F.3d 846, 850 n. 7 (9th Cir. 1996), Judge Kozinski opined that "The Second Amendment embodies the right to defend oneself and one’s home against physical attack." In United States v. Hutzell, 217 F.3d 966, 969 (8th Cir. 2000), the court held that "... an individual's right to bear arms is constitutionally protected, see United States v. Miller ...." In United States v. Emerson, 270 F.3d 203 (5th Cir. 2001), the court examined United States v. Miller and held: "We reject the collective rights and sophisticated collective rights models for interpreting the Second Amendment. We hold, consistent with Miller, that it protects the right of individuals ... to privately possess and bear their own firearms ...."

The U. S. Supreme Court has recently recognized the Second Amendment as an important individual right. Planned Parenthood v. Casey, 505 U.S. 833 (1992); United States v. Verdugo-Urquidez, 494 U.S. 259 (1991).

On December 17, 2004, the U.S. Department of Justice published an exhaustive Second Amendment memorandum. It concludes without reservation that "the Second Amendment secures a personal right of individuals, not a collective right that may only be invoked by a State or a quasi-collective right restricted to those persons who serve in organized militia units." http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/2004opinions.htm

The Founding Fathers distrusted a government that wouldn't trust its people. To fulfill the promise of the Declaration of Independence, the authors of the U.S. Constitution and its Bill of Rights made it clear that individual rights were paramount. The Bill of Rights, wrote Madison, was "calculated to secure the personal rights of the people."

Some claim that banning only certain firearms does not constitute an infringement of Second Amendment rights. That measured ploy is not new. George Mason exposed it at Virginia's constitutional convention in 1788: "[W]hen the resolution of enslaving America was formed in Great Britain, the British Parliament was advised by an artful man . . . to disarm the people; that it was the best and most effectual way to enslave them; but that they should not do it openly, but weaken them, and let them sink gradually."

Our founders risked their lives to create a free nation, and they guaranteed freedom as the birthright of American citizens through the Bill of Rights. The Second Amendment remains the first right among equals, because it is the one we turn to when all else fails.

_________________
J. Tillett
Forum Moderator

"Praise the Lord and pass the ammunition." -Howell M. Forgy, chaplain on a U.S. cruiser, Pearl Harbor, 12/7/41
89whiteandnerdy
89whiteandnerdy
Senior Moderator
Senior Moderator

Posts : 216
Join date : 2007-11-30
Age : 30
Location : North Carolina

View user profile http://capcc.forumotion.com

Back to top Go down

gun control Empty Re: gun control

Post by Just Me on Tue Jan 29, 2008 3:15 pm

Although I think guns are great... think about the difference that would be happening in Kenya right now if guns were in the hands of the general populace. Only 800 people have died in the last several weeks of rioting and ethnic cleansing. However, if the population had guns, I guarantee the number would have been in the 10 of thousands.

Just Me
Newbie
Newbie

Posts : 6
Join date : 2007-12-22

View user profile

Back to top Go down

gun control Empty Re: gun control

Post by YoungStonewall on Tue Jan 29, 2008 4:10 pm

However, if the population had guns, I guarantee the number would have been in the 10 of thousands.

If the population were armed the stong would have no advantage over the weak, and far less violence would occur in the first place.

A person with a firearms is 80% effective in accomplishing their goal, whether their goal is rape, murder, theft etc. or defending themselves or their family.

A gun functions as a deterent in much the same way as nuclear weapons. If everyone has them it levels the playing field, and makes the evildoer think twice about attacking someone, he has no idea if they are armed.

_________________
_______________________
YoungStonewall

"Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for dinner.
Liberty is two wolves attempting to have a sheep for dinner and finding a well-informed, well-armed sheep."
YoungStonewall
YoungStonewall
High Lord Protector Against Sanity
High Lord Protector Against Sanity

Posts : 194
Join date : 2007-12-09
Age : 36
Location : I have gone to find myself. If I should come back before I return...keep me here.

View user profile

Back to top Go down

gun control Empty Re: gun control

Post by BrianEschen on Tue Jan 29, 2008 8:36 pm

Just Me wrote:Although I think guns are great... think about the difference that would be happening in Kenya right now if guns were in the hands of the general populace. Only 800 people have died in the last several weeks of rioting and ethnic cleansing. However, if the population had guns, I guarantee the number would have been in the 10 of thousands.

This a common fallacy that is propounded by anti-gun activists. History however does not bear this out. A precursor to the slaughter of a country's citizens is the removal of the right of those citizens to keep and bear arms. The proper use of guns prevents ethnic cleansing. Frontline Fellowship is a missions organization that has had much experience regarding this issue with their missions projects across Africa. If you want to see, across the boards, what gun free zones are like visit their website. For an interesting article see http://www.christianaction.org.za/firearmnews/2005-01_CriminalsPreferUnarmedVictims.htm
While it sounds plausible that it is safer to have an unarmed populace, the opposite is actually the case as evidenced again and again throughout history. Our founders understood this clearly, hence the 2nd amendment. afro
BrianEschen
BrianEschen
Experienced Contributor
Experienced Contributor

Posts : 192
Join date : 2007-12-10

View user profile

Back to top Go down

gun control Empty Re: gun control

Post by bob4242 on Thu Jan 31, 2008 3:33 pm

BrianEschen wrote: A precursor to the slaughter of a country's citizens is the removal of the right of those citizens to keep and bear arms.

Hey, I'm new here, but had to jump in on this one. Brian, if a country's removal of the right to bear arms is a precursor to the slaughter of its citizens, then why haven't we seen the systematic slaughter of the citizens of Great Britain? They've had strong gun control laws for years. . . Just curious.

Also, I wanted to open up a new question for discussion: Where do you draw the line? Everyone believes in gun control, but we have different opinions about where to draw that line. For instance, I don't think any of us believes that the citizens of the US should be allowed to bear nuclear weapons. So, we all believe in gun control. Where, then, do you draw the line? Handguns? Full-auto guns? Grenade launchers? Fully armed Apaches? Abrams? Tomahawks? What should a government ban from being used by its citizens?
bob4242
bob4242
Loafer
Loafer

Posts : 4
Join date : 2008-01-31

View user profile

Back to top Go down

gun control Empty Re: gun control

Post by YoungStonewall on Fri Feb 01, 2008 1:24 pm

The flaw in your question is that you assume there is a line.

Currently private corporations within the US own and operate armed attack helicopters, armored vehicles, and have large stockpiles of machine guns, grenades, and assault rifles. All of this is legal.

If you have a private trust or corporation you can have all of this too.

What I am saying is that all law abiding US citizens should be able to own whatever they can afford. If you want a machine gun or a supressor (sometimes mistakenly refered to as a silencer) you should be able to buy one without giving up any of your Bill of Rights.

_________________
_______________________
YoungStonewall

"Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for dinner.
Liberty is two wolves attempting to have a sheep for dinner and finding a well-informed, well-armed sheep."
YoungStonewall
YoungStonewall
High Lord Protector Against Sanity
High Lord Protector Against Sanity

Posts : 194
Join date : 2007-12-09
Age : 36
Location : I have gone to find myself. If I should come back before I return...keep me here.

View user profile

Back to top Go down

gun control Empty Re: gun control

Post by 89whiteandnerdy on Tue Feb 05, 2008 3:52 pm

Just as a general comment, this thread started by talking about gun control laws in the United States. Are discussions of other countries relevant? Even if "Just Me" is right about Kenya, does it apply to us here, with a different culture and political system?

_________________
J. Tillett
Forum Moderator

"Praise the Lord and pass the ammunition." -Howell M. Forgy, chaplain on a U.S. cruiser, Pearl Harbor, 12/7/41
89whiteandnerdy
89whiteandnerdy
Senior Moderator
Senior Moderator

Posts : 216
Join date : 2007-11-30
Age : 30
Location : North Carolina

View user profile http://capcc.forumotion.com

Back to top Go down

gun control Empty Gun Control

Post by waxhawflyer on Fri Feb 08, 2008 10:49 pm

The Constitution is quite clear on this issue. Since we don't use the Constitution much anymore, I'm afraid the right to keep and bear arms is going to evaporate (hopefully not in my lifetime). Most of the sheeple of America don't know much about the Constitution, much less that there is a problem. With the number and quatlity of the replies on this subject, there may be a glimmer of hope. I have a number of casset tapes (for those of you with antique listening devices) by Mr. Bill Caruth called "Stick To Your Guns" about this subject.
Drop me a pm if you would like one and I'll make arrangements to get one to you.

The Waxhaw Flyer
waxhawflyer
waxhawflyer
Neanderthal Man
Neanderthal Man

Posts : 13
Join date : 2007-12-07

View user profile

Back to top Go down

gun control Empty Re: gun control

Post by BrianEschen on Tue Feb 12, 2008 8:19 pm

bob4242 wrote:
BrianEschen wrote: A precursor to the slaughter of a country's citizens is the removal of the right of those citizens to keep and bear arms.

Hey, I'm new here, but had to jump in on this one. Brian, if a country's removal of the right to bear arms is a precursor to the slaughter of its citizens, then why haven't we seen the systematic slaughter of the citizens of Great Britain? They've had strong gun control laws for years. . . Just curious.

That's a good point. Upon further reflection, I will admit that I have overstated my case. It is merely one manifestation of the destruction of a citizen's peace and freedoms. I would argue that strong gun control laws are a precursor to increased lawlessness whether it be from a countries citizens or from its civil magistrate. A well armed populace is the last defense against tyranny. When Israel was under foreign oppression there were strict "gun control" laws. On the other hand, the rebuilding of the walls under Nehemiah was accomplished because the people remained well armed (it actually prevented violence).

There is a missionary I heard speak once who ministers in Muslim countries. The first time he went to preach to a crowd of Muslims, his escorts implored him to carry an rifle with him. He assured them that it wasn't necessary. When he started preaching to the crowd, they began assaulting him and beating him. It was with difficulty that his escorts got him safely out. Subsequently he has always carried his rifle with him in that country while preaching to Muslims and has not experienced another incident. Guns help prevent violence not create it.

Lastly, it is great to know that there will be a day when the nations will beat the swords into plowshares and their spears into pruning hooks. A day when the nations will not learn war anymore. On that day I will gladly relinquish my weapon. Until then . . . it would be pretty difficult to get it from me. Smile
BrianEschen
BrianEschen
Experienced Contributor
Experienced Contributor

Posts : 192
Join date : 2007-12-10

View user profile

Back to top Go down

gun control Empty Re: gun control

Post by bob4242 on Sun Mar 02, 2008 9:40 pm

Youngstonwall wrote:
The flaw in your question is that you assume there is a line.

Stonewall,
You are correct in saying that there is not a universal ethical line that can be drawn for all instances, but a government has to legislate gun control somewhere. One of the purposes of government is to protect its citizens (and allow them to protect themselves), and I believe that it is in our best interest that they make laws banning certain types of weapons from private citizens (nuclear weapons, etc.). So I will narrow my question: Where should the line be drawn for private citizens in the United States?
Stonewall: You mentioned "whatever they can afford". I'm curious where everyone draws their own line. Personally, I haven't thought much about where I would draw my fuzzy line, but I think that citizens should be able to own powerful enough weapons that, en masse, they could repel a military coup (worst case scenario). I don't think that means grenades, but I do think it means full-auto. Just curious what everyone else thinks. . .

Brian, I too look forward to the day when our "Swords will be beaten into plowshares".
bob4242
bob4242
Loafer
Loafer

Posts : 4
Join date : 2008-01-31

View user profile

Back to top Go down

gun control Empty Re: gun control

Post by YoungStonewall on Mon Mar 03, 2008 1:06 pm

Where should the line be drawn for private citizens in the United States?

If I have an extra $45 Million lying around and want to cough it up for an F-16 I should have that right.

AIM-9 Sidewinders only cost $83,000 each and AIM-120 Slammers only a paultry $400,000 each.

And fuel will run you $1400/hour (if you buy enough to get the government discount)

If I have that kind of money I should be able to have my own personal jet fighter, and air-to-air misslies.

_________________
_______________________
YoungStonewall

"Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for dinner.
Liberty is two wolves attempting to have a sheep for dinner and finding a well-informed, well-armed sheep."
YoungStonewall
YoungStonewall
High Lord Protector Against Sanity
High Lord Protector Against Sanity

Posts : 194
Join date : 2007-12-09
Age : 36
Location : I have gone to find myself. If I should come back before I return...keep me here.

View user profile

Back to top Go down

gun control Empty Re: gun control

Post by 89whiteandnerdy on Mon Mar 03, 2008 1:13 pm

Yikes.

_________________
J. Tillett
Forum Moderator

"Praise the Lord and pass the ammunition." -Howell M. Forgy, chaplain on a U.S. cruiser, Pearl Harbor, 12/7/41
89whiteandnerdy
89whiteandnerdy
Senior Moderator
Senior Moderator

Posts : 216
Join date : 2007-11-30
Age : 30
Location : North Carolina

View user profile http://capcc.forumotion.com

Back to top Go down

gun control Empty Re: gun control

Post by TheWylff on Mon Mar 03, 2008 7:28 pm

People should not be allowed to have weapons powerful enough to destroy an entire city. A gun? Well, I'm undecided about my thoughts on that, but if the government has guns, people should probably have them too. I do not trust man farther than a two year old can throw him. If a man kills a man, that's a serious offence, but it might be a risk you have to take. A man will kill a man weapons or no. But nuclear weapons? If an individual (I'm not in favour of even our government having it, but that's another matter) has a bomb powerful enough to destroy a city, that's too much risk. If they are allowed to do that, look what people could do? A person could take over the government that way. That's just as bad as the government taking over the people. The fact of the matter is, there is too much evil and sin and too much risk to chance it. I'm not in favour of any modern weapons, but certainly not in favour of citizens especially having weapons that can wipe out hundreds or thousands of lives in an instant. No matter how much they cost.
TheWylff
TheWylff
Experienced Contributor
Experienced Contributor

Posts : 133
Join date : 2007-12-11
Location : Talamh Duine, Mainland, Highland Kyndar region

View user profile http://www.fidelitybiblekits.com/theedp

Back to top Go down

gun control Empty Re: gun control

Post by 89whiteandnerdy on Wed Mar 12, 2008 3:21 pm

Check out this video. What a witness against gun control advocates! I like her last statement... Smile
I wish more Americans would stand up to our corrupt legislators like this.

_________________
J. Tillett
Forum Moderator

"Praise the Lord and pass the ammunition." -Howell M. Forgy, chaplain on a U.S. cruiser, Pearl Harbor, 12/7/41
89whiteandnerdy
89whiteandnerdy
Senior Moderator
Senior Moderator

Posts : 216
Join date : 2007-11-30
Age : 30
Location : North Carolina

View user profile http://capcc.forumotion.com

Back to top Go down

gun control Empty Re: gun control

Post by BrianEschen on Fri Mar 21, 2008 12:16 am

Given the current case being brought before the Supreme Court . . . I thought it would be a good time to pose this question . . . Would you feel safer living in a city where guns were easily available or living in a city with strict gun regulations? cherry
BrianEschen
BrianEschen
Experienced Contributor
Experienced Contributor

Posts : 192
Join date : 2007-12-10

View user profile

Back to top Go down

gun control Empty Re: gun control

Post by TheWylff on Fri Mar 21, 2008 2:53 pm

I would feel much safer living in a city with strict gun regulations. The way people act...the harder it is for them to get firearms, the better.
TheWylff
TheWylff
Experienced Contributor
Experienced Contributor

Posts : 133
Join date : 2007-12-11
Location : Talamh Duine, Mainland, Highland Kyndar region

View user profile http://www.fidelitybiblekits.com/theedp

Back to top Go down

gun control Empty Re: gun control

Post by Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

Page 1 of 2 1, 2  Next

Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum