It is time to revise/update the U.S. constitution..... - Page 14 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 04-20-2007, 04:59 PM   #196
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,499
Local Time: 11:09 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by BonoVoxSupastar


I'm sorry, but there's something funny about Hillary running a martial law fascist state.


agreed. Rudy is way, way more autocratic.
__________________

__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 04-20-2007, 05:00 PM   #197
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
Vincent Vega's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Berlin
Posts: 6,615
Local Time: 05:09 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by A_Wanderer
And if the day ever came that law enforcement and the military were used to supress the population what then?

And that gets to the the root of it; if you take away people right to bear arms then there it is that much easier for a tyrannical regime to tread on the rights of it's population without concequence. Gun ownership is a liberty, like many liberties it is double edged and there are negative concequences when people are irresponsible but the security that is gained by removing weapons from the hands of law abiding citizens is at the expense of liberty and it will not prevent criminals from getting illegal weapons (as there are other channels for them to be obtained).

It seems Americans appreciate their right to bear arms, I only hope that in future it is matched by equally fervent belief in the right to free speech (against government and religious institutions) and religious freedom (no persecution on promotion of any religious beliefs).
Hm, interesting. In most countries gun owners make up only a very small amount of citizens, and there are strict laws and restrictions on gun owning.
Still we found ways to implement systems to reduce the risk of getting overrun by our own state, like every other industrialised country.
There is no need for guns in every household, and if it should ever get so far I think it's too late anyways.
__________________

__________________
Vincent Vega is offline  
Old 04-20-2007, 05:00 PM   #198
Refugee
 
Snowlock's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Posts: 1,211
Local Time: 10:09 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Vincent Vega


That's a great logic, isn't it.
Because, murder is illegal, speeding is, robbery and theft is, but it still occurs.
You can't prohibit it, it still occurs, so why not legalizing it?
No, the logic is, guns are a civil liberties, one of the original intents of the forefathers of this country. If we're going to take it away we better not do it lightly. If we do take it away, will it be worth it? I say no because it's going to happen anyway (gun proliferation I mean). I'm not a big fan of messing with the constitution just to try something out.
__________________
Snowlock is offline  
Old 04-20-2007, 05:03 PM   #199
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
Vincent Vega's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Berlin
Posts: 6,615
Local Time: 05:09 AM
Oh, I forgot, the Holy Constitution, meant by the forefathers never to be adjusted at all. Never to be changed at all.
And the right to bear arms, that's the key of the Constitution, right?
__________________
Vincent Vega is offline  
Old 04-20-2007, 05:08 PM   #200
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,697
Local Time: 10:09 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Snowlock


No, the logic is, guns are a civil liberties, one of the original intents of the forefathers of this country. If we're going to take it away we better not do it lightly. If we do take it away, will it be worth it? I say no because it's going to happen anyway (gun proliferation I mean). I'm not a big fan of messing with the constitution just to try something out.
And I'm not a big fan of holding on to antiquated, unjustifiable rights just for status quo sakes.
__________________
BVS is offline  
Old 04-20-2007, 05:09 PM   #201
Refugee
 
Snowlock's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Posts: 1,211
Local Time: 10:09 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Vincent Vega
Oh, I forgot, the Holy Constitution, meant by the forefathers never to be adjusted at all. Never to be changed at all.
And the right to bear arms, that's the key of the Constitution, right?
If you're dissing the consitution I'm not sure what to say as it's pretty much universally recognized as the strongest blueprint to set up a country ever created by people a lot smarter than you or I. In fact, your own consitution was based in large part on ours (assuming you're in germany)

I don't think I need to defend it as its success pretty much speaks for itself.
__________________
Snowlock is offline  
Old 04-20-2007, 05:10 PM   #202
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,499
Local Time: 11:09 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Snowlock
I'm not a big fan of messing with the constitution just to try something out.


as an aside, many in the pro-gun camp (am assuming Republicans) seemed to be perfectly willing to fuck with the Constitution when it comes to relegating gay people to being 2nd class citizens.

but that's an aside, and not directly relevant to your position, but i do hope that the Republicans aren't going to warn us about messing with the Constitution, because that would be the very height of hypocrisy.
__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 04-20-2007, 05:12 PM   #203
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,697
Local Time: 10:09 PM
I think you missed his point. His point was the forefathers were intelligent enough to know things change and life evolves therefore designed the constitution able to modify with those changes that occur.
__________________
BVS is offline  
Old 04-20-2007, 05:13 PM   #204
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Zoots's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: the great beyond
Posts: 36,802
Local Time: 06:09 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Irvine511

[q]Domestic incidents are exactly the type of incident that the statement "guns don't kill people, people kill people" was made for. If the gun wasn't around in the case of a domestic incident, most definately a knife (or whatever) would be used. These are cases were the killer isn't driven to use a gun on someone; they're driven to kill. Gun's just the quickest way.[/q]

but that's why guns are so dangerous. they are so quick, and so effective, that the heat-of-the-moment impulses can result in death. you're going to have a much better chance of surviving a stabbing, or a beating, than of getting shot. 2/3rds of all spousal murders are done with guns. it's not so much that people kill people but that people use guns to kill people, and guns make people much, much, much better at killing people.
Exactly! I agree!

Quote:
Originally posted by Irvine511
i think that banning guns won't stop legitimate criminals -- the gangs, the Tony Sopranos of the world -- but i think it would do much to reduce the number of domestics that result in murder.
That's a great point!
__________________
Zoots is offline  
Old 04-20-2007, 05:14 PM   #205
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 16,297
Local Time: 11:09 PM
I love the talk of these magical law-abiding citizens who don't abuse guns.

Guy goes crazy, catches wife in bed with another guy, loses his mind, picks up the gun in his garage and shoots her. He used to be law abiding. (And btw, these cases aren't rare, I could cite a dozen just off the top of my head)

Stupid teenager and his 3 buddies go to a 7-11, they're horsing around, decide to be dumb and steal a 6-pack of beer, it goes wrong, one of them happens to have a gun, shoots the cashier. No previous history of criminality, no previous convictions, hey, maybe it was his buddy's gun - he just happened to be holding it.

9 year old boy finds one of his father's guns in the basement, plays around with it, accidentally shoots his sister and the family dog. No history of criminal behaviour.

Guy owns house backing onto ravine, hates how neighbourhood cats and dogs wander on to his property. Sees a beagle taking a dump, picks up his gun to teach it a lesson and misses, shooting the mother of 3 who happened to be walking the dog. No history of criminal behaviour.

Guy's business is crumbling, he's got debt collectors showing up, he's under stress, they're relentless, he orders them out of his store, they refuse, he picks up a gun and shoots. No history of criminal behaviour.

Guy's wife tells him she's leaving him and the kids and is going to clean him out and by the way, his dick is small and she's repulsed by looking at him. He's enraged, picks up his hunting rifle, shoots her, the inlaws who live on the main floor of their house and then takes his own life.

Everyone is law abiding initially.
__________________
anitram is offline  
Old 04-20-2007, 05:17 PM   #206
Refugee
 
Snowlock's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Posts: 1,211
Local Time: 10:09 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Irvine511




as an aside, many in the pro-gun camp (am assuming Republicans) seemed to be perfectly willing to fuck with the Constitution when it comes to relegating gay people to being 2nd class citizens.

but that's an aside, and not directly relevant to your position, but i do hope that the Republicans aren't going to warn us about messing with the Constitution, because that would be the very height of hypocrisy.
Well, as an aside, there are many in the anti-gun camp (am assuming Democrats) that seemed to be perfectly willing to legalize drugs because they think they are unbanable. :-)
__________________
Snowlock is offline  
Old 04-20-2007, 05:17 PM   #207
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,499
Local Time: 11:09 PM
i suppose i'm beginning to think that there can be something of a phased withdrawal of guns. a tightening of what's legal and what's not. as well as an extensive background check that includes mental illness. and an extensive training course. i spent hours and hours getting certified for SCUBA.
__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 04-20-2007, 05:19 PM   #208
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,499
Local Time: 11:09 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Snowlock


Well, as an aside, there are many in the anti-gun camp (am assuming Democrats) that seemed to be perfectly willing to legalize drugs because they think they are un-bannable. :-)

when you say "drugs," do you mean marijuana? or do you mean all drugs -- because i think marijuana should at the least be decriminalized, or at least a misdemeanor, but i am not an advocate of the legalization of drugs like meth or heroin.
__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 04-20-2007, 05:19 PM   #209
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,697
Local Time: 10:09 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by anitram


Everyone is law abiding initially.
Exactly, that's why this thread is cracking me up. I mean just look at the reason this thread was started.

2 legal guns bought by a law-abiding citizen.
__________________
BVS is offline  
Old 04-20-2007, 05:25 PM   #210
Refugee
 
Snowlock's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Posts: 1,211
Local Time: 10:09 PM
Leaving for work, and as much as I enjoy a good debate like this, I'm not staying on a friday to debate the rest lol. But this part I wanted to leave with till later:

Quote:
Originally posted by Irvine511

i agree, in theory, but up until the moment he entered the campus with the guns in tow, Cho did nothing illegal. had it been much harder to acquire guns, had -- and i think this is totally rational -- his time in a hospital ward been noted on his permanent record and disqualified him from being able to purchase a gun, he would have had a much tougher time getting his weapons.
But stiffer gun control would do the exact same thing. I'm certainly not opposed to that. I'm not against waiting periods or making background checks more extensive or anything like that. I agree Cho could've probably been stopped from getting a gun. But I think gun control would've done that.

And before anyone says it, don't tell me he could've gotten a gun from a relative or stolen it if gun control stopped him. He could've done that anyway if guns were banned.
__________________

__________________
Snowlock is offline  
 

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 11:09 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