This is a MUSIC forum. Irrelevant or disrespectful posts/topics will be removed by Admin. Please report any forum spam or inappropriate posts HERE.

All users can post to this forum on general music topics.

Moderators: bandmixmod1, jimmy990, spikedace

#144944 by Chaeya
Wed Apr 20, 2011 2:44 pm
Bob, Switzerland was never invaded because they're surrounded by mountains, not because everybody owns a gun. Also the Swiss had a very formidable army a long time ago. Many kings including, Louis XIV hired the Swiss army. The only reason they own guns now is that from the time you're 18 till 40 or 45 I think, every man has to go serve in the army at certain times a year. A number of them fight every year to get excused from this duty. The guns are for military use, not to pull on your neighbor for disrespecting you or to feel safe in case of a home invasion or robbery. The Europeans joke quite often about America and its violence and addiction to guns.

Chaeya

#144949 by Slacker G
Wed Apr 20, 2011 3:04 pm
For those who have not been around long enough to have this knowledge and rely on propaganda of the regimes past and present. The leftists have done their best to brainwash little mush heads through public school system propaganda machines. And the little mush heads remain ignorant for the need for Americans to bear arms to this very day.
This is what they should have been teaching you in school. If they had, we would still have a say in government. However, as it is, government takes more liberty away from the citizens every day without fear of reprisal. For those who graduated with reading comprehension: :)

There are several versions of the text of the Second Amendment, each with slight capitalization and punctuation differences, found in the official documents surrounding the adoption of the Bill of Rights.[5] One version was passed by the Congress,[6] while another is found in the copies distributed to the States[7] and then ratified by them.

As passed by the Congress:

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.

As ratified by the States:[citation needed]

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.

The original hand-written copy of the Bill of Rights, approved by the House and Senate, was prepared by scribe William Lambert and resides in the National Archives.



In no particular order, early American settlers viewed the right to arms and/or the right to bear arms and/or state militias as important for one or more of these purposes:

* deterring undemocratic government;
* repelling invasion;
* suppressing insurrection;
* facilitating a natural right of self-defense;
* participating in law enforcement;
* enabling the people to organize a militia system.

Which of these considerations they thought were most important, which of these considerations they were most alarmed about, and the extent to which each of these considerations ultimately found expression in the Second Amendment is disputed. Some of these purposes were explicitly mentioned in early state constitutions; for example, the Pennsylvania Constitution of 1776 asserted that, "the people have a right to bear arms for the defence of themselves and the state".

A foundation of American political thought during the Revolutionary period was the well justified concern about political corruption and governmental tyranny. Even the federalists, fending off their opponents who accused them of creating an oppressive regime, were careful to acknowledge the risks of tyranny. Against that backdrop, the framers saw the personal right to bear arms as a potential check against tyranny. Theodore Sedgwick of Massachusetts expressed this sentiment by declaring that it is "a chimerical idea to suppose that a country like this could ever be enslaved . . . Is it possible . . . that an army could be raised for the purpose of enslaving themselves or their brethren? or, if raised whether they could subdue a nation of freemen, who know how to prize liberty and who have arms in their hands?" Noah Webster similarly argued:

Before a standing army can rule the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops that can be, on any pretence, raised in the United States.

George Mason argued the importance of the militia and right to bear arms by reminding his compatriots of England's efforts "to disarm the people; that it was the best and most effectual way to enslave them . . . by totally disusing and neglecting the militia." He also clarified that under prevailing practice the militia included all people, rich and poor. "Who are the militia? They consist now of the whole people, except a few public officers." Because all were members of the militia, all enjoyed the right to individually bear arms to serve therein.

#144959 by Slacker G
Wed Apr 20, 2011 4:24 pm
OK. Have you read this? At just what point will people say they have had enough?

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/mich-co ... r-knowing/

I am sure many will think, "So what? They already know everything about me" But that is not the point. :twisted:

Did you know that your i phone has kept a record of every where you have been for the past year? Since last June? A file that YOU can not access without an app but someone else can? The file can not be erased. Could there be a link between that and the link posted above? Apple won't tell you about why it is there. Story on UK Guardian.

"So what? They already know everything about me" But that is not the point.

#144970 by philbymon
Wed Apr 20, 2011 7:31 pm
I realize that hand guns are for killing ppl. That is exactly why I want them - to kill anyone threatening my family or myself.

I have huge issues with any gov't that would remove the right for its citizens to arm themselves.

I will have guns whether they are legal or no, & I will use them responsibly - even against my gov't, if need be.

#144973 by jimmydanger
Wed Apr 20, 2011 7:49 pm
The problem with handguns, of course, is that they can be concealed easier than long guns. And who would want to conceal them? Criminals, of course. Can you defend your home and family with a long gun? Absolutely, and arguably better.

#144976 by MikeTalbot
Wed Apr 20, 2011 8:15 pm
Jimmy

You are way off track. The govt doesn't get to tell us what guns we can have. The only hope for freedom is to have THEM be afraid of US.

Since their despicable drug war has militarized both the mobsters and the police (scant difference) I find my hi cap pistol very comforting. And I can't secure a shot gun in my pants or my glovebox. A gun is no good if you don't have it handy when you need.

The day I say those freaks pull the truck drive out of his cab and break his skull (Rodny King riots) I've kept a pistol handy and will continue to do so always. They may hurt me but I will most certainly hurt them.

The bottom line though - is self defense is a God given or natural right. The govt scum don't get a say in it. If you allow it - you get Chicago where the only unarmed people are the law abiding citizens - also known as chumps.

I'd add that several years ago my wife and I were driving to a Sunday school meeting around 7pm on a Sunday night. A guy in downtown Lilburn (Atlanta suburb) tried three times to run me off the road. I hollered "Glock!" and my wife grabbed my pistol, cocked it, put it in my hand. I pointed it out the window - preparing to use it. The bad guy hit his breaks hard. I didn't know him from Adam. Should I have gone home to my shotgun?

Talbot

#144978 by jimmydanger
Wed Apr 20, 2011 8:31 pm
Mike, there's a huge difference between protecting your home and family and pointing a gun at someone in a road rage incident. Had you killed someone, you would have been locked up for a long time. That should tell you that you're way off.

#144983 by Chaeya
Wed Apr 20, 2011 9:58 pm
This argument is just getting downright funny as hell. Dragging up old stuff from the 1700s. This ain't the 1700s. We're not fighting an army that had one shot then had to reload; where your worst weapon was maybe a canon.

If you want a gun, own a gun. Even if you own one legally, you can't just go firing it off at people without responsibility. I listen to squareheads always going "well, I'll go get my gun." How about learning to avoid the situation to begin with? So you shoot a guy who you say was threatening you. Well be prepared to go through intense police questioning and you'd better be able to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that you had no other recourse other than to shoot him. If you have a district attorney who's down on his cases, he just may want to make an example of you and people like you with guns, and there's a big expense fighting the case. Then you may have the victim's family who swears he was a good guy till you cut him down and they decide they want to sue your pants off. Oh the woes of being a big dick with a gun. Then there is the spiritual recourse for your actions. You may convince the police that you had no other recourse, but to shoot. If you acted out of your own ego and not for the good of the cause, you will pay. You can have any belief that you want, but life has its own repercussions.

America, We Like God, But In Guns We Trust,

Chaeya

#144985 by gbheil
Wed Apr 20, 2011 10:41 pm
Anyone whom knows anything about exterior ballistics knows the best and most logistically safe self defense weapon is a short shotgun.

Which constitutionally is totally irrelevant.

From my cold dead hands.

#144990 by ANGELSSHOTGUN
Wed Apr 20, 2011 11:01 pm
Chaeya is right, this is getting downright funny. Way to many misconceptions.
First of all a 2 ton vehicle is a very dangerous weapon and the licensing for using such a weapon is ridiculous. In Belgium it's a 4 hour road test, fail twice no license. Road rage,,, that's a whole different issue.
Pointing a gun and pulling the trigger are completely different than yelling a warning. Road rage incidents are highest in states that have stiff gun control laws, and high taxes. Doesn't seem the two are related? Any way,,,
A homeless man was just charged with felony assault with a deadly weapon, in a NY subway. Seems some women felt empowered to tell him not to light a cigarette. She was right in the law, unfortunately he slashed her face wide open with a PEN.
Funny,NO, Crazy, yes.
What is coming is not going to be funny, and yes will be crazy.

Wild west? We are already way beyond that. Ahh the good old days, when a man had plenty of work, and money, and gunfights were mostly fictitious writing.

Aim small miss small. Anyone happy with $4.00 gas, Thank our government for slowing down all the drilling permits and thus increasing our dependence on foreign oil. Oil production here down 13%. :x

#144991 by gbheil
Wed Apr 20, 2011 11:13 pm
I don't have to "go get my gun"

I always have one ...

The British Land Pattern Musket and the Pennsylvania rifle were the "assault weapons " of the era of our constitution.
( The Pope declared the Crossbow the ultimate weapon of war and insisted that it would end all forms of warfare )

The second amendment was written about military weapons, cannon, shot and powder. Nothing to do with "self defense" or " sporting "

It's about keeping the " government " honest.

Nothing has changed since Cain slew Able.

Men are evil...

Si vis pacem para bellum.

From my cold dead hands ...

#144992 by ANGELSSHOTGUN
Wed Apr 20, 2011 11:18 pm
OH, and once again it all comes down to very thing our great country was founded on. The very tenets most religions preach and often fail because of the very most important God given GIFT, that is most misunderstood.

PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY.

#145010 by MikeTalbot
Thu Apr 21, 2011 1:26 am
Jimmy

If I had fired my pistol at the assailant in the car it is VERY unlikely I'd have been locked up. This is Georgia - I man not only can defend himself, when he has a woman with him he is expected to. We were attacked with deadly force - I was prepared to respond with same. in GA we carry weapons in the glove box. Quite legal.

Yet if you break down our crime statistics - almost all of it is committed by minorities - and almost always by the under class that is festering in our cities.

I was running from the cops a couple years ago and ran inbtween houses. I was on the backporch with a shotgun and my next door neighbor yelled, "I'll get mine..." and the guy across the way had a pistol in his hand directing the cops into the path into the woods where bad guy had run.

My point is not tell a macho story - but illustrate the fact that while we are indeed armed, we rarely shoot anyone. Three of us all had that guy in range and we could have shot him easily. The deputies wouldn't have minded and we had concern for our families and all that - but basically, we shoot only in self defense. Period. No threat to life, no bang.

The people who shoot other people don't buy their weapons legally. And contrary to myth, they usually have crappy firearms - all though thanks to the drug war that is changing. Gun laws mean nothing to them and they are getting some very good weaponry from South of the border - contrary to what our masters would have us believe.

in the Chicago the gangs are known to have crew served weapons. There is a whole lot of ugly things going down that are outside our periphery but will affect us and probably soon. Wouldn't it seem awful silly to give up our sidearms while things are becoming more dangerous?

cheers
Talbot

#145016 by Slacker G
Thu Apr 21, 2011 2:16 am
The second amendment was written about military weapons, cannon, shot and powder. Nothing to do with "self defense" or " sporting "

It's about keeping the " government " honest.


I printed (quoted) a few of the considerations they explored while writing the second amendment. ( above)

If you read it you will see that it had nothing to do with the military. It was written into the constitution for the sole purpose of protecting the states from big government and to protect the nation from tyranny. Including protection FROM the government military. They knew the military could not stand against an armed citizenry.

Neither was it about hunting squirrels and turkeys or for protecting themselves from Indians. It was to turn back government going against the will of the people that they were supposed to be serving. Not like anything like that would happen today in our trustworthy government.

When the rubber hits the road, and it will in short order, many of you who want to abolish guns will wish to h@ll you had one. And those of you who do have them will thank those who saw far enough into the future to grant you that right. Mark my words.

#145020 by gbheil
Thu Apr 21, 2011 3:19 am
And just for the record.

I have taken many head of game for my family to eat with ... a handgun.
I've fired hundreds of thousands of rounds (much I loaded myself) in competition and just for fun.
I've defend my children ( and myself ) from stray mad dogs and wild hogs.
I own / have owned pistols and revolvers in
.22 Long rifle
.22 Magnum
.36 & .44 cap n ball
.38 Special
.357 Magnum
.44 Magnum
.41 Magnum
.40 S&W
.45 ACP
.45Long colt

I've never fired a round at my fellow man.
Though the presence of my weapon has more than once averted a criminal act.

So don't give me any sh*t about what handguns are made for.

You have no idea what your talking about.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests