Assault weapon ban?

That's fine and dandy except motor vehicles are not protected by a constitutional amendment, nor do motor vehicles provide the people a reasonable grasp at ensuring their government works for them and not the other way around.

It's not a "want", it's a right. IMHO, a God given right. The most basic right of any human is self-defense; and self-defense involves equipping yourself with the competent weapon(s) of the time.

 

And people will always do heroin, people will always grossly break speed limits, people will always rape, people will always burglarize. Doesn't mean you don't try to limit certain cries from happening.

It's to the point where we have two mindsets. First being "well, lets just accept the United States will always be a culture of violence and killing, so lets just make sure the citizens have the appropriate firearms to defend against the law breakers," And then the other mindset of well, lets not just accept this country blows, lets try, if possible to prevent at least SOME of these crimes from happening in the first place rather than saying okay its gonna happen lets just make sure we can shoot people when it does happen."

 

sammy, i think you are right in that canada has a much different societal makeup/etc... i think that certain semi-auto rifles are allowed and owned by folks up there (kinda like CA, NY, etc..) - maybe someone who knows this stuff from canada could chime in on specifics... what i do know is that canada spend billions of dollars on "keeping tabs" on gunowners w/ a registration database, ...and of course it could not be shown to decrease crime, ...and canada did the right thing in abolishing this registry just last year (a monumental move to thwart gun control)

 

But personally I thin that comes down to your general right to own firearms, not specific firearms, doesn't it? Remember, that whole amendment came about in a time when muzzle loaders were the weapon of choice.

The first couple words of the amendment reference it being "well regulated" and the fact that many private gun sales legally take place with no sort of background checks comes through as grossly unregulated to me. We talk about criminals getting weapon regardless. WEll its not hard for them to get them via a private sale if theres no checks and balances in place.

 

The problem is if these weapons, mags, etc are banned then the criminals wont just be those who use the items for harm but once upon a time citizens that wont give them up. Thats why the first AWB had a grandfather clause. At this point theyre are soo many "assualt rifles" in the market anyone will be able to buy one that wants one and citizen to citizen gun purchases have much less documentation and zero background checks.

Not disagreeing with you at all was just highlighting who will be considered a criminal

 

the whole "first amendment thing" came into being when "printing presses" were technology of the day... "freedom of the press" - have you ever wondered where that terminology came from?... so, by your argument, if the "means" at the time somehow determines what is protected, ..then there is no protected right to use more modern telecommunications media (i.e. the founders never "envionsed that")

...so you see how this game works, ...absurdity vs. absurdity... i kinda like how that comes together so nicely

EDIT:
also, you haven't a clue what "well regulated" mean in the parlance of the day... well regulated meant, at the time of the ratification, routinely practiced, ready for action, etc..

 

If a ban went though, would companies like MAGPUL be pretty much out of business? It just seems like there are tons of AR manufactures and AR accessories out there. I cant see a market to operate off of if there is a ban.

That could be a deterent to a ban. Everyone wants to look like COD.

 

lol. I get what you're saying. I just don't understand how if an assault weapon ban were to exist again(regardless of what it would or wouldn't accomplish" how it would effect these peoples right for this amendment. The amendment gives us the right to bear arms but doesn't say what type of arms. Does this mean I should be allowed any weapon I want? What if I feel a government takeover via tanks. Should I be allowed to have an RPG under my 2nd amendment rights then?

Like I said I truly don't know where I stand on a ban or no ban I just haven't heard a valid argument against it other than "it wouldn't work" or "it takes away my liberties"

EDIT: what do you mean I don't know what well regulated means? Everyone wants to cry their second amendment rights for what they are and theyre being taken away. Someone who's never touched a firearm in their life and has no training can go out and buy an AR15. To me, not well regulated. If everyone wants to claim these rights, you cant pick and choose what part of the amendment fits your argument.

 

well, see that's the "grey area of it all", ..i.e. what is protected, and what isn't?... it is a valid question, and the SCOTUS has somewhat answered this in Heller v. D.C... they said that the 2A is a "fundamental right", an individual right, ...and that commonly possess firearms are protected... they didn't go into much more detail, but they did state that... now, you also have to consider, that there are many "small arms" that are not "firearms" (rockets, grenades, etc..), and so it has been, by default, believed that these things probably stray outside protection because they are more weapons of mass destruction (rather than firing a small projectile), and many are not so conducive to "bearing". antoine scalia (a SCOTUS justice) has alluded that the "scope" of the 2A could be looked into further in future cases...

 

You're confusing the well regulated militia part (national guard) with the second part "the right of the people to keep and bear arms."

 

So the right of the people to bear arms is to not be regulated?

I just want to know why so many people are against any change in gun laws, especially since no one will ever over the top take away your right to have guns. Banning one specific weapon doesn't take away your rights. Is everyone here okay with the fact that people can buy weapons with no training whatsoever?

 

You should really do some research before you post. There are plenty of weapons that most people think are illegal that can be purchased legally. Explosives are one of them as with fully auto machine guns, suppressors, short barrelled rifles(SBRs), etc. With time some documents and cash they all can be had by American citizens. As long as u can pass a few different background checks.

When the 2nd amendment was written the American Revolutionist were using the same weapons as the British Army, muzzle loaders. Our forefathers understood that taking away citizens weapons would lead to the ability of a tyrannical govt to easily dictate what those citizens did. So they made this amendment, to give American citizens the ability to protect themselves: from the govt, a foreign power, crazy lunatic. They understood the need of a strong militia, which you are a part of

 

death by a thousand paper cuts... history is proof enough... that's how the game is played... absolute power corrupts absolutely... the founders understood this, ...when the brits tried to confiscate their guns, they shot back at them... the rest is history...

 

Completely different argument. I would like more education for gun ownership as well as for driving privileges and several other aspects of peoples lives that affect other people. But that has nothing to do with banning a certain kind of weapon.

 

I never said fully auto, suppressors, etc. were outright illegal under any circumstances whatsoever.

My whole issue is to how banning one item over another effects your liberties or 2nd amendment right. I couldn't care less what is banned. I just want to know how it is taking away your rights, since that what everyone is hiding behind. YOURE NOT TAKING AWAY MY RIGHTS OR WEAPONS.

To me it just comes off completely as a want/hobby vs. I need this for my rights violation.

 

What you are not understanding is that however many millions of hi cap mags you remove from the population, you're only getting them from law abiding citizens. Those criminals who don't own them will still be able to obtain them on the black market.

Those who would use them to harm others will laugh at your "collection points".

America is such a great country (despite the fact that you may think it "blows") that people like yourself don't understand how evil works, because you're insulated from it. Spend some time in a patrol car or on a combat deployment and you will meet evil, and you will see it laugh in the face of "laws" and "bans". The only thing it respects is force.

 

And as I said, I don't actually support a ban or not ban. See I'm looking at this as a whole problem vs. just with the tragedy in CT. For me gun control isn't necessarily about banning or not banning. I just think part of this countries problem with so many people who aren't even criminals that shouldnt have weapons just due to a basic lack of training, safety, etc.

Perhaps my opinions arent necessarily specific to this thread aside from how a ban would effect ones liberties. I digress.

 

Mike there was no National Guard back then,, Fred the farmer was the militia..At that time the gov wanted Fred armed ..something for the Brits to think about...

 

I've been on ride alongs before I suppose that doesn't count. You can have a condescending attitude all you want towards what you think i don't understand. Thats fine. I just don't agree with the solution of not trying to fix the problem and just throwing a band aid on it. Lets be clear, that is what you're doing. And again, I'm no sure why I have to keep pointing this out, I never said we should ban anything. I'll just unsubscribe from this since clearly everyone wants to pick and choose parts of an argument to better suit their argument.

Maybe before telling me what I don't know some should take a quick look at the definition of wants vs rights. That appears to be the obvious problem here. "BUT TWELVE PEOPLE MIGHT BREAK INTO MY HOUSE DOUBLE FISTING AK47's I NEED THIS ABRAMS FOR SELF DEFENSE CRIMINALS FOLLOW NOW RULES!!!!!!' Where does it end?

 

i’ll tell them to shuve the ban but there you know what.