Youth Model Shotguns - Page 4 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind
Click Here to Login
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 02-26-2009, 01:07 PM   #46
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
Vincent Vega's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Berlin
Posts: 6,615
Local Time: 08:43 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by AchtungBono View Post

Terrorists strap gun and bullet belts on their kids and teach them to kill from a very young age. Why would such an enlightened country like the U.S. encourage the teaching of violence to 11 year old kids? What possible good can come from it?

What's next? A baby bomb? A kiddie knife? A toddler tank?

I would say you are arguing from an Israeli perspective here and, sorry to say, confuse it with what it actually is like in the US rural areas. Going hunting with a person that young is totally unheard of here in Germany as well, but it seems more like the norm in the States. But going hunting is much more about teaching those children responsibility about what they are doing, what they are actually carrying in their hands and responsibility towards the animals. It's not at all teaching them violence, and the argument of gun belts, bombs etc. is mute.
And looking at the case at hand, it's by far too simplified to infer that the gun made the kid commit the crime, and it is not safe to assume that the kid became violent due to going hunting. That's to be found by a closer examination of his case.

From hunting rifles to baby bombs really is a stretch.
And the issue of gun violence, or violent crime rates in general in the US as compared to other states is an extremely complex issue with no simple answers. Neither guns for all nor guns for no one is the answer to that one.
__________________

__________________
Vincent Vega is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2009, 02:09 PM   #47
Refugee
 
The_Pac_Mule's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Vermont
Posts: 1,342
Local Time: 02:43 PM
Quote:
There is only one solution to this problem (and you're all going to hate me for this.....) - BAN ALL PRIVATELY-OWNED GUNS!!!

The only people who should be allowed to own guns are those in law enforcement, and certainly guns should never be accessible to young children.
Violation of the Second ammendment. Americans should have the right to feel safe in their homes, becasue not everyone lives in a safe neighborhood.

It doesn't make sense. How would making a law stop people who are going to use a gun to break the law? This leaves the bad people with guns, and the innocents without.
__________________

__________________
The_Pac_Mule is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2009, 02:09 PM   #48
Galeonbroad
 
Galeongirl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Schoo Fishtank
Posts: 70,773
Local Time: 08:43 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liesje View Post
I wouldn't have a problem with that. Not sure how it works since most people hunt on private land though.

Honestly I don't think we are disagreeing. I'm just trying to say that most poeple that do hunt are already doing so responsibly. It's not fair to make such general statements about hunting and hunters. You only hear about the worst cases and the nutcase people. My extended family has been hunting since we've been in this country and we've never had a single incident where a gun was used improperly. Having a cop and a DNR officer in your hunting group is good insurance of that.
We're not disagreeing.
I'm glad there are plenty of people who are responsible. My thoughts are just that the government should do something to make sure those irresponsible will be dealt with BEFORE they do something stupid.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by GraceRyan View Post
And if U2 EVER did Hawkmoon live....and the version from the Lovetown Tour, my uterus would leave my body and fling itself at Bono - for realz.
Don't worry baby, it's gonna be all right. Uncertainty can be a guiding light...
Galeongirl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2009, 02:14 PM   #49
Galeonbroad
 
Galeongirl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Schoo Fishtank
Posts: 70,773
Local Time: 08:43 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by The_Pac_Mule View Post
Violation of the Second ammendment. Americans should have the right to feel safe in their homes, becasue not everyone lives in a safe neighborhood.

It doesn't make sense. How would making a law stop people who are going to use a gun to break the law? This leaves the bad people with guns, and the innocents without.
Wrong. It's no violation of the ammendment.

It says they have the right to feel safe. Nothing mentioned about guns.
If nobody had guns, you wouldn't feel unsafe without one. There are plenty of things to be safe with, you can put an alarm on your house, get guard dogs or geese, that kinda stuff. If 'they' don't have guns, you don't need one.
It's a vicious cycle if you think like this. I need a gun because you have one, and you have one because they have one.

The law won't stop people breaking it with guns, but it'll make the treshold higher for those who might commit a crime or those who commit one out of panic or despair. They won't have easy access to guns so it'll be harder for them to actually commit the crime and a lot won't happen.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by GraceRyan View Post
And if U2 EVER did Hawkmoon live....and the version from the Lovetown Tour, my uterus would leave my body and fling itself at Bono - for realz.
Don't worry baby, it's gonna be all right. Uncertainty can be a guiding light...
Galeongirl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2009, 02:19 PM   #50
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
Vincent Vega's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Berlin
Posts: 6,615
Local Time: 08:43 PM
Well, the second ammendment specifically mentions the right to carry a gun, but the interpretation is quite dependent on the individual's position towards an armed society and in part due to the question how to read the commas.
__________________
Vincent Vega is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2009, 02:40 PM   #51
Refugee
 
The_Pac_Mule's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Vermont
Posts: 1,342
Local Time: 02:43 PM
Quote:
It says they have the right to feel safe. Nothing mentioned about guns.
quite the contrary

Quote:
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.
I don't think when this was wrote they were talking about clubs and knives..

Obviosuly there must be some regulation. As much as I'd like to mount a howitzer on my roof, I can't I'm all for the ban of assault weapons and such. But banning all publicly owned guns is a clear violation of the second amendment.
__________________
The_Pac_Mule is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2009, 03:37 PM   #52
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,648
Local Time: 01:43 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by The_Pac_Mule View Post

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.

Obviosuly there must be some regulation. As much as I'd like to mount a howitzer on my roof, I can't I'm all for the ban of assault weapons and such. But banning all publicly owned guns is a clear violation of the second amendment.
What does what you wrote have to do with a militia?
__________________
BVS is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2009, 03:43 PM   #53
Blue Crack Addict
 
Liesje's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: In the dog house
Posts: 19,557
Local Time: 02:43 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Galeongirl View Post
It says they have the right to feel safe. Nothing mentioned about guns.
If nobody had guns, you wouldn't feel unsafe without one. There are plenty of things to be safe with, you can put an alarm on your house, get guard dogs or geese, that kinda stuff. If 'they' don't have guns, you don't need one.
It's a vicious cycle if you think like this. I need a gun because you have one, and you have one because they have one.
But this is assuming that people have guns to "feel safe". A lot of people don't, they have guns to hunt. The guns are kept unloaded, often in pieces, in locked gun safes, obviously offering zero protection anyway.

Also, some people just collect them. I was just reading last night on another board one of the members was talking about how he almost purchased this vintage pistol that's never been fired.

I probably know three dozen people who own guns, and of those people, only two of them own or carry guns intended for protection or use on another human being, and these two people are trained officers who have to carry as their job (I don't know if either has ever had to use their weapon).
__________________
Liesje is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2009, 03:52 PM   #54
Galeonbroad
 
Galeongirl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Schoo Fishtank
Posts: 70,773
Local Time: 08:43 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liesje View Post
But this is assuming that people have guns to "feel safe". A lot of people don't, they have guns to hunt. The guns are kept unloaded, often in pieces, in locked gun safes, obviously offering zero protection anyway.

Also, some people just collect them. I was just reading last night on another board one of the members was talking about how he almost purchased this vintage pistol that's never been fired.

I probably know three dozen people who own guns, and of those people, only two of them own or carry guns intended for protection or use on another human being, and these two people are trained officers who have to carry as their job (I don't know if either has ever had to use their weapon).
I know that, and I don't mind guns in possesion for that.

But what The_Pac_mule is trying to get across is that he apparently thinks he needs a gun to feel safe.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by GraceRyan View Post
And if U2 EVER did Hawkmoon live....and the version from the Lovetown Tour, my uterus would leave my body and fling itself at Bono - for realz.
Don't worry baby, it's gonna be all right. Uncertainty can be a guiding light...
Galeongirl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2009, 04:16 PM   #55
The Male
 
LemonMelon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Hollywoo
Posts: 65,789
Local Time: 11:43 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bonoa View Post
But do you really think that works? Is that the solution?
I believe she was referring to protecting oneself from bears and the like, not walking around suburbia with a shotgun, taking down the paperboy. Rural areas are filled with wildlife that lack mercy and sound judgment.
__________________


Now.
LemonMelon is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2009, 04:25 PM   #56
Blue Crack Addict
 
Liesje's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: In the dog house
Posts: 19,557
Local Time: 02:43 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Galeongirl View Post
I know that, and I don't mind guns in possesion for that.

But what The_Pac_mule is trying to get across is that he apparently thinks he needs a gun to feel safe.
I agree with that. I don't like guns, I would feel LESS safe that I'd hurt myself or someone could take my gun and use it on me.
__________________
Liesje is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2009, 05:40 PM   #57
Forum Moderator
 
yolland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 7,471
Local Time: 08:43 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vincent Vega View Post
Well, the second ammendment specifically mentions the right to carry a gun, but the interpretation is quite dependent on the individual's position towards an armed society and in part due to the question how to read the commas.
Right, there's historically been considerable debate as to whether the positioning of the clause mentioning 'militias' might be taken to imply that the federal guarantee of this particular "right of the people" in fact only applies to guns 'kept and borne' in the context of state militia (National Guard) service. However, as of the US Supreme Court's 5-4 decision last year in District of Columbia v. Heller, it would seem that the answer is No, that federal guarantee of this right is NOT restricted to weapons 'kept and borne' for that purpose. But the District of Columbia isn't a state, so this still doesn't once-and-for-all resolve the question of whether and to what extent an actual state might be allowed to 'infringe' on this right. It's only a question of time now, though, before a case directly challenging some individual state's attempts to do so winds up in the Supreme Court. And since the Supreme Court has tended very strongly over the last century to rule that provisions of the Bill of Rights are also enforceable against the states via the Fourteenth Amendment's Due Process Clause, it seems likely that any such case would result in extensive 'infringements' by states on gun ownership (like Heller's near-total handgun ban) being found unconstitutional, given the precedent established by Heller.

So basically, we're very unlikely to see major changes in gun ownership rates being effected through law anytime soon, as present interpretations of the Second Amendment simply don't leave room for that.
__________________
yolland [at] interference.com


μελετώ αποτυγχάνειν. -- Διογένης της Σινώπης
yolland is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-28-2009, 06:53 PM   #58
Refugee
 
The_Pac_Mule's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Vermont
Posts: 1,342
Local Time: 02:43 PM
Quote:
What does what you wrote have to do with a militia?
Ah, and thats where it gets tricky. The whole debate is whether the right to have firearms is only valid if you are part of a "militia," as stated above by Yolland.

Quote:
But what The_Pac_mule is trying to get across is that he apparently thinks he needs a gun to feel safe.
I don't have a gun
__________________
The_Pac_Mule is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-02-2009, 10:43 PM   #59
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
the iron horse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: in a glass of CheerWine
Posts: 3,251
Local Time: 02:43 PM
"A gun is a tool, Marian; no better or no worse than any other tool: an axe, a shovel or anything. A gun is as good or as bad as the man using it. Remember that."

~Shane
__________________
the iron horse is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-03-2009, 09:12 AM   #60
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 24,974
Local Time: 02:43 PM
So is a gun as good or as bad as the child using it?

Do guns come equipped with impulse control?
__________________

__________________
MrsSpringsteen is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:43 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com