Who Shouldnt Have Guns?

[dahermit]

I hope you wear ear protectors when shooting a .458 Winchester!

Always when shooting now. But, too late. In early days, sound damage was not widely known...only people who wore protection were target shooters who did not want the sound to effect their concentration.
I have lost at least 50% in both ears, never shoot without both soft plugs and muffs now.

 

[dahermit]

There is no need to over-rationalize the meaning of the ammendment. The right to bear arms merely facilitates the formation of the militia. The militia was designed as the states primary defense against foreign aggression.

The existence of a PROFESSIONAL ARMY under the control of the president makes the above point moot.

Well numnuts, it would seem that you just had five Supreme Court Justices disagree with your foreign, intrusive, non-American citizen interpretation of the Second Amendment. Your paper target must have had scoring rings and have warped. Back into the rice paddy on your water buffalo.

 

[Federal Farmer]

There is no need to over-rationalize the meaning of the ammendment. The right to bear arms merely facilitates the formation of the militia. The militia was designed as the states primary defense against foreign aggression.

The existence of a PROFESSIONAL ARMY under the control of the president makes the above point moot.

numinus, you have failed to account for the fact that the professional Army is NOT the militia. We have the "unorganized militia" which is composed of all able bodied men, and women, in compliance with Title 10 and Title 32 of the United States Code, the "organized militia" which is the National Guard, and the "regular military" which is the Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps, and those parts of the Coast Guard which have been activated and placed under the jurisdiction of the Navy.

The Militia is specifically provided for in the USC since we have something called Posse Comitatus, which specifically precludes the Active Duty military from being used inside the United States for Law Enforcement duties unless Martial Law has been declared.

 

[PLC1]

Originally Posted by numinus
There is no need to over-rationalize the meaning of the ammendment. The right to bear arms merely facilitates the formation of the militia. The militia was designed as the states primary defense against foreign aggression.

The existence of a PROFESSIONAL ARMY under the control of the president makes the above point moot.

Not according to the Supreme Court:

https://www.houseofpolitics.com/forum/showthread.php?p=44113&posted=1#post44113

 

[Locke]

Anyone who isn't a member of the armed forces shouldn't have guns.

Great so now the gov. would be 100% in control? c'mon

end

 

[Federal Farmer]

Anyone who isn't a member of the armed forces shouldn't have guns.

Didn't the Nazi's try that? OH YEAH, THEY DID! I wonder how that worked out? As I recall, the Soviets tried that too, as did the Chinese. Hmm, let's look at that a bit closer shall we?

In 1911, Turkey established gun control. From 1915 to 1917, 1.5 million Armenians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

In 1929, the Soviet Union established gun control. From 1929 to 1953, about 20 million dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated. By 1987 that figure had risen to 61,911,000.

China established gun control in 1935. From 1948 to 1952 10,076,000 political dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated in Kuomintang China, and by 1987 another 35,236,000 exterminations were carried out under the Communists.

Germany established gun control in 1938 and from 1939 to 1945, 13 million Jews and others who were unable to defend themselves were rounded up and exterminated.

Cambodia established gun control in 1956. Between 1975 and 19793, 2,035,000 "educated" people, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

Guatemala established gun control in 1964. From 1964 to 1981, 100,000 Mayan Indians, without the means to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

Uganda established gun control in 1970. From 1971 to 1979 under General Idi Amin Dada, 300,000 Christians and political rivals of Amin, unable to defend them*selves, were rounded up and exterminated.

In a March 1976 coup in Argentina, a military junta seized power and went on a campaign to wipe out left-wing terrorism with terror far worse than the one they were combating. For seven years thousands of people, most of them dissidents and innocent civilians unconnected with terrorism, were arrested and then vanished without a trace, the Argentinian service chief's version of Hitler's Nacht und Nebel directive. After democracy was restored in 1983, a national commission was appointed to investigate the fate of "los desaparecidos." That report revealed the systematic abductions of men women and children and the methodic use of torture and murder. Human rights groups say up to 30,000 people were killed or "disappeared" as the military waged its campaign against a disarmed citizenry.

The United Nations imposed gun control after civil war broke out in Bosnia-Herzegovina in 1992. Although the town of Srebrenica was a UN-designated "safe area," in July of 1995 more than 7,000 unarmed Muslim men and boys were murdered by Serb forces as the UN forces in the town proved unable or unwilling to help its Muslim population.

Defenseless people rounded up and exterminated in the 20th Century because of gun control: at least 56 million... that we know about. The places are all too familiar: Stalin's Russia, Nazi Germany, Communist China, Uganda, Rwanda, Guatemala, Cambodia, Armenia, The Sudan, Bosnia and many more.

Additionally, in 2006 the genocide of unarmed victims in Darfur is unfathomably bad, more than two million people, yet no one has acted to stop it. The United Nations has failed to issue any meaningful sanctions against the openly racist Islamist dictatorship in Khartoum perpetrating it, or to even call it a genocide.

If you wish to join these 56 million + "victims" of "gun control", by all means, feel free, but I have no desire to, and I refuse to allow you, or anyone else, to take from me what is Rightfully mine.

 

[GOP(JT)]

Who shouldn't be able to buy guns? Anyone with a criminal history, and anyone who hasn't passed a gun safety course. Anyone who has a history of hunting from vehicles, or shooting at noises in the brush. Anyone who likes to carry a gun to "shoot snakes", ie, go blasting away at a harmless snake while bullets bounce at random everywhere. Anyone with a history of mixing alcohol and gunpowder.

There are probably more categories, but not every drunken redneck in the country should have a firearm.

haha i used to shoot snakes cause they got into my house through the heating system.... so i shouldn't have a gun?

 

[PLC1]

haha i used to shoot snakes cause they got into my house through the heating system.... so i shouldn't have a gun?

If the bullets were bouncing around your house, no, you shouldn't, at least not until you've passed a firearms safety course and learned to use a weapon correctly.

Shooting snakes in the house!

Was your Mom home?

Did she ask why there were holes in the walls?

 

[Not Amused]

Restricting the ability of specific groups of people from obtaining guns legally in the US will not act as any sort of compelling deterrent from foul play of any description, the criminal element will always have access to guns.

Accidental shootings are quite another kettle of fish, but how does one remove that reasonably high risk without removing the civil rights of the ordinary people; whilst not actually preventing the criminal element from accessing them in the slightest?

A tricky one.

 

[PLC1]

Restricting the ability of specific groups of people from obtaining guns legally in the US will not act as any sort of compelling deterrent from foul play of any description, the criminal element will always have access to guns.

Accidental shootings are quite another kettle of fish, but how does one remove that reasonably high risk without removing the civil rights of the ordinary people; whilst not actually preventing the criminal element from accessing them in the slightest?

A tricky one.

Yes, it is a tricky one. There is no way to keep criminals from having weapons just by passing laws. They are, after all, criminals, and don't really care much about laws anyway.

We should be able to discourage the use of firearms by people who don't know how to use them safely, simply by requiring a course of education as a prerequisite to purchasing guns.

 

[Jarlaxle]

If the bullets were bouncing around your house, no, you shouldn't, at least not until you've passed a firearms safety course and learned to use a weapon correctly.

Shooting snakes in the house!

Was your Mom home?

Did she ask why there were holes in the walls?

There are ways to do this safely...the easiest I can think of would be very-low-velocity .22 rounds, or standard-charge composition loads.

 

[PLC1]

There are ways to do this safely...the easiest I can think of would be very-low-velocity .22 rounds, or standard-charge composition loads.

Or, perhaps, just pick the snake up and throw it out the door. If it keeps coming in, whack it on the head with a fire poker.

 

[Not Amused]

Or, perhaps, just pick the snake up and throw it out the door. If it keeps coming in, whack it on the head with a fire poker.

Why bother with the poker I ponder? I thought Americans were expert snake jugglers

 

[Jarlaxle]

Yeah, because everyone has a fireplace poker handy at all times!

But hey...if you want to try to grab, say, a rattlesnake or a copperhead bare-handed, go for it!

 

[PLC1]

Yeah, because everyone has a fireplace poker handy at all times!

But hey...if you want to try to grab, say, a rattlesnake or a copperhead bare-handed, go for it!

If it's a rattlesnake or a copperhead, then start with the poker. If you don't have a poker, a broom handle will do. I've killed rattlesnakes before, but never had to use a gun to do it.

My original statement had to do with blasting away at a harmless snake with bullets bouncing at random. I still think that's dangerous. Maybe if you disagree, you'd like to try a little experiment: I'll get a .357 magnum and put a rubber snake on the living room floor (your living room, not mine), and start blasting away while you share the room with me. How does that sound?