Are you a supporter of the 2nd amendment, or do you support restrictions? - Page 8
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 11-10-2012, 06:52 PM   #71
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
vincent's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Mid-Atlantic NC
Posts: 4,122
Liked 1958 Times on 1030 Posts
Likes Given: 4286

Default

"Laws that forbid the carrying of arms . . . disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes . . . Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man."
--Thomas Jefferson, quoting Cesare Beccaria in On Crimes and Punishment (1764).

__________________
vincent is offline  
2
People Like This 
Reply With Quote
Old 11-10-2012, 10:19 PM   #72
Lifetime Supporting Member
FTF_LIFETIMESUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 1 reviews
 
Vikingdad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Santa Cruz Mountains,CA
Posts: 13,980
Liked 8285 Times on 4788 Posts
Likes Given: 10716

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by shadecorp View Post
I am all for us "GOOD" guys having unlimited rights to any firearm.
Including Full Auto.
However,
That does NOT include my gangsta neighbors.
We MUST have laws and restrictions.
Sadly, Laws and restrictions apply only to us "GOOD" guys.
Be careful who you vote for.
Amen.
The restrictions you suggest are on people, not the Second Amendment. Correct? There is a distinction.
__________________
Vikingdad is offline  
2
People Like This 
Reply With Quote
Old 11-11-2012, 04:49 AM   #73
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 820
Liked 156 Times on 115 Posts
Likes Given: 3

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by shadecorp
I am all for us "GOOD" guys having unlimited rights to any firearm.
Including Full Auto.
However,
That does NOT include my gangsta neighbors.
We MUST have laws and restrictions.
Sadly, Laws and restrictions apply only to us "GOOD" guys.
Be careful who you vote for.
Amen.
That is exactly right, I don't want all restrictions taken away, but they don't need to restrict things even more... I can think of many things that are more important to our country at this time, why are the feds so worried about our guns and not our nations debt
__________________
95sniper is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 11-11-2012, 06:03 AM   #74
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 26
Liked 2 Times on 1 Posts

Default

The 2nd amendment wasnt meant for hunting and putting food on the table. Its meant for to defend ourselves against the government when it gets to big and out of controll

__________________

“I am the punishment of God...If you had not committed great sins, God would not have sent a punishment like me upon you.

Arizeus is offline  
2
People Like This 
Reply With Quote
Old 11-11-2012, 01:26 PM   #75
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Pasco Cty.FL
Posts: 6,593
Liked 2506 Times on 1428 Posts
Likes Given: 1947

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vikingdad View Post
wtf??........
Sorry, a sardonic reference to "Jeopardy!", in which

Alex Trebek is the host...
__________________
therewolf is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 11-11-2012, 02:39 PM   #76
Lifetime Supporting Member
FTF_LIFETIMESUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 1 reviews
 
Vikingdad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Santa Cruz Mountains,CA
Posts: 13,980
Liked 8285 Times on 4788 Posts
Likes Given: 10716

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by therewolf View Post
Sorry, a sardonic reference to "Jeopardy!", in which

Alex Trebek is the host...
Ah. OK, was totally lost on me (I won't say it was "over my head" because it was a TV reference- )
__________________
Vikingdad is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2012, 12:56 AM   #77
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Ben91's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 61
Liked 9 Times on 3 Posts

Default

IMHO the only arms that should be restricted is large destructive devises (i.e. Mortars, artillery, rocket launcher's, etc.) And the only restrictions on those is safe handeling classes. Like a driver's license.

__________________
Ben91 is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2012, 01:39 AM   #78
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
RevDerb's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Snover, MI
Posts: 214
Liked 15 Times on 10 Posts
Likes Given: 3

Default

Like the Bible, the Constitution and Bill of Rights are written in words whose definitions do not evolve over time. The 2A clearly declares that NO LIMITS are to be placed on ANY American in regard to bearing and keeping arms. And, BTW, the Bible does not contain the 10 Suggestions.

__________________
VietNam Era Vet. USN/USNR NRA, GOA
"If you desire peace, prepare for war."
RevDerb is offline  
3
People Like This 
Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2012, 03:56 AM   #79
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
hawkguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: austin,tx
Posts: 4,063
Liked 2851 Times on 1689 Posts
Likes Given: 1881

Default

Quote:
RevDerb;1010987]Like the Bible, the Constitution and Bill of Rights are written in words whose definitions do not evolve over time. The 2A clearly declares that NO LIMITS are to be placed on ANY American in regard to bearing and keeping arms. And, BTW, the Bible does not contain the 10 Suggestions.
ha! put twenty of the most devoted christian followers in the world together in one room with a bible, and you will get twenty different views on virtually every sentence in the bible. proof that man can interpret the same words in VASTLY different ways.

"arms" was simply never clarified in 2A. even the most staunch supporters rarely think citizens should be able to own chemical, biological, or nuclear weapons. most don't even want to citizens with access to powerful explosives. all are "arms." just as a musket is "arms." this leaves the 2A more debatable than it simply appears.

the average swat team/police have access to the m-16/ar-15 or the like. this should be good enough for american citizens as well. i think the gun restrictions as they stand are OK (of course i live in texas, not cali )

but any further gun restrictions imo, need to be focused on keeping guns away from the violent, not the law abiding.
__________________
hawkguy is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2012, 04:12 AM   #80
The Apocalypse Is Coming.....
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 28,735
Liked 21585 Times on 12248 Posts
Likes Given: 53672

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hawkguy View Post
ha! put twenty of the most devoted christian followers in the world together in one room with a bible, and you will get twenty different views on virtually every sentence in the bible. proof that man can interpret the same words in VASTLY different ways.

"arms" was simply never clarified in 2A. even the most staunch supporters rarely think citizens should be able to own chemical, biological, or nuclear weapons. most don't even want to citizens with access to powerful explosives. all are "arms." just as a musket is "arms." this leaves the 2A more debatable than it simply appears.

the average swat team/police have access to the m-16/ar-15 or the like. this should be good enough for american citizens as well. i think the gun restrictions as they stand are OK (of course i live in texas, not cali )

but any further gun restrictions imo, need to be focused on keeping guns away from the violent, not the law abiding.
while agree with your assessment of interpretations of the Bible and such, i think the founding fathers knew that some idiots would try and interpret the 2nd admendment from it's true meaning, so therefore they made it simple and concise. even small children have no problem understanding it, why do some adults?

i believe in no gun restrictions whatsoever, period. the one we have now are unconstitutionas as it is. there was a time when a person could walk into a hardwar store and buy dynamite. i don't think the average citizen should have nuclear, biological or chemical weapons. nor do i think the average citizen needs them either.

the thing is all gun control laws are answers to problems that were never solved, crime. in the wake of stupid tragedies involving firearms of some sort, they get on the bandwagon and start trying to push more gun control on us in response to these incidents. they blame the firearms and the LAC is the one who is punished not the perpertrator or the criminals. time has proven that gun control laws, restritions and bans have been ineffectual in detering or preventing crime, and more restrictions or gun control laws will not change this one iota.

my simple belief is, "Shall Not Be Infringed". if they want restrictions or controls, they need to go to the source and that's the criminals. i think we all know the criminals are going to fully disregard any new laws as they have disregarded past ones.
__________________
Axxe55 is offline  
2
People Like This 
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 03:56 PM
Do you really support the Second Amendment? opaww Legal and Activism 48 04-09-2010 08:12 PM
Ranger Up & ASP Support The 2nd Amendment opaww Politics, Religion and Controversy 1 08-05-2009 09:49 PM