Are you a supporter of the 2nd amendment, or do you support restrictions? - Page 2
Firearm & Gun Forum - FireArmsTalk.com > General Firearms Forums > Legal and Activism > Are you a supporter of the 2nd amendment, or do you support restrictions?

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 11-07-2012, 03:37 AM   #11
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 4,900
Liked 2058 Times on 827 Posts
Likes Given: 2706

Default

The only restriction I believe that there should be is if anyone votes for osamaobama they should not be allowed to own any firearms or knife

__________________
opaww is offline  
4
People Like This 
Reply With Quote
Old 11-07-2012, 04:30 AM   #12
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
orangello's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 19,155
Liked 5734 Times on 3360 Posts
Likes Given: 4877

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by robocop10mm View Post
While I supprt the 2nd Amendment, I feel there are SOME restrictions that are reasonable. "Arms" is a very broad category that were not even inagined by the Founding Fathers. Grenades, Mortars, Artillery (cannons, not .50 Desert Eagles), Nukes, Chemical weapons, etc. are innapropriate (IMHO).

Felons, especially violent ones, are deserving of restrictions. If the right to vote can be restricted for this category of people, so can the right to bear arms.

...

Most of us can agree there are SOME reasonable restrictions. We just argue over WHAT restictions are reasonable.
My problem is not with the restrictions but with who decides who is a member of a restricted group/class and the particulars of what is restricted from that group/class. I don't trust the state or federal government to do that. Until a trustworthy entity with something like mind-reading abilities for judging the worth of a man or men to defend themselves is found and agrees to be the judge of OUR RIGHTS, then i will consider all restrictions on the right recognized by the Second Amendment unconstitutional and unjust.

It is the duty of every American to do what they can to subvert, avoid, dishonor, and decry unconstitutional laws.


I have yet to see a reasonable explanation for how a felon, after completing his sentence, is no longer a citizen of these United States. Irregardless of that felon's citizenship, he still has the natural right to an armed self defense, though it isn't recognized by the U.S. Constitution.
__________________

Dead Bears, the only good kind.


Last edited by orangello; 11-07-2012 at 04:33 AM.
orangello is offline  
2
People Like This 
Reply With Quote
Old 11-07-2012, 04:36 AM   #13
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Lima,Ohio
Posts: 3,079
Liked 2747 Times on 1234 Posts
Likes Given: 2649

Default

So we all agree that the "no firearms" signs are a restriction that don't work. So how are other restrictions going to work? We have severe restrictions in most of the major metropolitan areas, has it stopped crime or even put a dent in it? We have laws against robbery, assualt, rape and murder let's start enforcing laws that pertain to bad behaviour and stop making laws against inanimate objects.

__________________
rjd3282 is online now  
3
People Like This 
Reply With Quote
Old 11-07-2012, 04:55 AM   #14
Moderator
FTF_MODERATOR.png
Feedback Score: 1 reviews
 
robocop10mm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Austin,Texas, by God!!
Posts: 10,316
Liked 2983 Times on 1554 Posts
Likes Given: 275

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by orangello View Post
My problem is not with the restrictions but with who decides who is a member of a restricted group/class and the particulars of what is restricted from that group/class. I don't trust the state or federal government to do that. Until a trustworthy entity with something like mind-reading abilities for judging the worth of a man or men to defend themselves is found and agrees to be the judge of OUR RIGHTS, then i will consider all restrictions on the right recognized by the Second Amendment unconstitutional and unjust.

It is the duty of every American to do what they can to subvert, avoid, dishonor, and decry unconstitutional laws.


I have yet to see a reasonable explanation for how a felon, after completing his sentence, is no longer a citizen of these United States. Irregardless of that felon's citizenship, he still has the natural right to an armed self defense, though it isn't recognized by the U.S. Constitution.
I don't disagree that the decisions are somewhat arbitrary.

When the right of the Supreme Court to judge the Constitutionality of a law is subverted, we have ANARCHY! (Not that a little Anarchy would not be a good thing to shake things up a bit).

I agree that some Felonies are greater than others and not all Felons should lose their gun rights for life. I support a system like Texas has that restricts firearms ownership for a period of 5 years after the discharge of the sentence. Keep your nose clean for 5 years, good to go. People are fallible and also redeemable (at least most are, redeemable). Losing your gun rights for a period of time is part of the punishment for ones transgressions against society. WTS there are a number of "crimes" that exist simply because our Government has arbitrarily decided that they want to control over us.
__________________

In life, strive to take the high road....It offers a better field of fire.
"Robo is right" Fuzzball

robocop10mm is offline  
2
People Like This 
Reply With Quote
Old 11-07-2012, 04:56 AM   #15
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
CHLChris's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Portland,Oregon
Posts: 2,523
Liked 190 Times on 129 Posts
Likes Given: 89

Default

"...and bear..."

Americans should have total rights to own and CARRY their guns.

__________________
.45acp, .40 S&W, 9mm, .38 Spl, .380 acp, 22lr
12 gauge, .223/5.56x45mm, 30-30 Winchester


2 Chron. 7:14 Christians must seek His face
CHLChris is offline  
2
People Like This 
Reply With Quote
Old 11-07-2012, 05:03 AM   #16
Lifetime Supporting Member
FTF_LIFETIMESUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 1 reviews
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Santa Cruz Mountains,CA
Posts: 14,528
Liked 8814 Times on 5097 Posts
Likes Given: 11487

Default

I am not at all for any restrictions on firearms. I am all for restrictions on people who can possess them, meaning that people who have been convicted of a felony, even after being released from prison, should not be allowed to own or possess a firearm. People who have been determined to be mentally incompetent too. They should have recourse to regain their right to possess firearms and it should not be an overly cumbersome process. Not all should regain these rights though.

I know a guy who is a hard core felon, he's a three striker. His first two convictions are for strongarm robbery. He is a gangbanger but I don't know if he is still associated with the gang. He lives in a really bad part of town with his extended family. This guy has a really short fuse and is a dangerously violent person. If it were up to me I would say that there is no way in Hell he should ever be able to possess a firearm again for self defense or any other reason.

I know another guy- good friend of mine- he was convicted of felony drug possession not too long out of high school (late '80's), no weapons involved. He has cleaned up his act since he got out of jail and has been clean ever since. He has a good job (construction foreman) with a great company, married with two great kids. Can't have a gun in the house. I believe he is a good candidate for having his gun rights restored.

So, in short, no blanket restrictions that affect every law abiding citizen, but restrictions on people can be reasonable.

__________________
Vikingdad is online now  
3
People Like This 
Reply With Quote
Old 11-07-2012, 05:05 AM   #17
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
orangello's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 19,155
Liked 5734 Times on 3360 Posts
Likes Given: 4877

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by robocop10mm View Post
When the right of the Supreme Court to judge the Constitutionality of a law is subverted, we have ANARCHY! (Not that a little Anarchy would not be a good thing to shake things up a bit).
When a car drifts too far left, crossing the centerline, the proper correction is to move the car in the opposite direction. The level of control this country's government has available against its citizens has "drifted" too far toward complete control of the citizenry; the proper correction is away from control, which happens to be in the direction of less government, just up the path a ways from Anarchy. Anarchy should be reserved for later, upon further review of the government's performance and hopefully its improvement.
__________________

Dead Bears, the only good kind.

orangello is offline  
2
People Like This 
Reply With Quote
Old 11-07-2012, 05:13 AM   #18
Lifetime Supporting Member
FTF_LIFETIMESUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 1 reviews
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Santa Cruz Mountains,CA
Posts: 14,528
Liked 8814 Times on 5097 Posts
Likes Given: 11487

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by orangello View Post
When a car drifts too far left, crossing the centerline, the proper correction is to move the car in the opposite direction. The level of control this country's government has available against its citizens has "drifted" too far toward complete control of the citizenry; the proper correction is away from control, which happens to be in the direction of less government, just up the path a ways from Anarchy. Anarchy should be reserved for later, upon further review of the government's performance and hopefully its improvement.
Anarchy is for if the Revolution doesn't work out.
__________________
Vikingdad is online now  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 11-07-2012, 05:25 AM   #19
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
QsGadgets's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 1
Default

So, now that Obama is back in we wont have any second amendment rights to fight for.

__________________
QsGadgets is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 11-07-2012, 05:36 AM   #20
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: \
Posts: 990
Liked 134 Times on 109 Posts
Likes Given: 43

Default

Everyone wants to blame the liberals. But what we have is mob rule instead true democracy. Our government responds to what a large segment of the population wants instead of upholding the constitution as it was written. After all a large segment of the population in certain states or counties can make or break a politician's career. Both political parties are equally to blame.

I believe in upholding the second amendment. I put my hand on the bible and swore to God that I would defend the constitution. Once I swear to God I will never back down on that promise. My ideas might be different than many of my friends here. I make no excuses. But my goal is the same as everyone that took the same oath I took, to defend the constitution.

__________________

"I do not aim with my hand; I aim with my eye. He who aims with his hand has forgotten the face of his father.
I do not shoot with my hand; I shoot with my mind. He who shoots with his hand has forgotten the face of his father.
I do not kill with my gun; I kill with my heart. He who kills with his gun has forgotten the face of his father."

Adopt a pet!! http://www.aspca.org/ Some of the finest pleasure horses come from here: http://www.canterusa.org/

Old_Crow is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Firearms Forum Replies Last Post
Second Amendment Restrictions Imposed Sniper03 Legal and Activism 9 12-28-2011 04:56 PM
Do you really support the Second Amendment? opaww Legal and Activism 48 04-09-2010 09:12 PM
Ranger Up & ASP Support The 2nd Amendment opaww Politics, Religion and Controversy 1 08-05-2009 10:49 PM