Gun Rights

[GBJoker]

Exactly. So why did you not concede the fact that Article V makes the Constitution difficult to update?

In the past, (ie, 1800s, to about WWII), people had different opinions on all aspects of life. That's just simply inevitable. The difference between then and now, is that America in general, when seeing something unjust or unfair, all stopped bickering, stood up (some times with their guns, nonetheless), and changed whatever needed to be changed. Such as allowing blacks, Hispanics, women, native Americans, and Asians the ability to have a 1:1 ratio vote with white males.

Now though, you can barely even think an opinion on any random topic without being shunned and rallied against with the full force of the opposition.

Making amendments used to be easy compared to now.

What the hell are you now talking about? I never even stated my views on the second Amendment?

What other reason to argue with me, unless you differ from my opinions on gun rights?

But it looks like I did educate you (since you seem to be supporting it now) about the underlying purpose of the Constitution. That's all my posts were really trying to clarify, not whether "the right to bear arms" should be done away with.

Uh... Sure. Lookit, the founding fathers grew up in a changing world, compared to several thousand years of very similar ideologies. They were only 250 years into the thought of going around the world westward to reach Asia. And they had really just discovered these two massive land masses (the Americas), and didn't know a single thing about them. They specifically made the Constitution in such a way as to be changed as the times changed. They knew the world wasn't going to stay the way they gew up in forever. That's why Article V is there.

Edit: Might as well add my viewpoint on the issue. Despite what you may believe, I actually do support the right to bear arms. It's a beautiful thing .

Then you've completely lost me as to why you're arguing with me.

 

[lreal]

@GbJoker
Sigh...Article V does allow change. But the question to ask is why is it so difficult to do so? That's the importance of Article V. To simply take the article at face value is to cheapen the true meaning behind it.

You really need to go back and reread our discussion if you think we've been talking about gun rights this entire time.

Too be honest, your responses seem to be written as an impulse to respond rather than backed by any actual thought or consideration. If you talk about the Constitution in this way with an educated crowd, you're not going to be taken very seriously.

I don't think I'll ever get through to you so I give up. Take that as a win if you want.

 

[GBJoker]

@GbJoker
Sigh...Article V does allow change. But the question to ask is why is it so difficult to do so? That's the importance of Article V. To simply take the article at face value is to cheapen the true meaning behind it.

You really need to go back and reread our discussion if you think we've been talking about gun rights this entire time.

Too be honest, your responses seem to be written as an impulse to respond rather than backed by any actual thought or consideration. If you talk about the Constitution in this way with an educated crowd, you're not going to be taken very seriously.

I don't think I'll ever get through to you so I give up. Take that as a win if you want.

I don't take the opposing side resorting to cheap shots as a win. Sorry.

 

[fulmetalotaku]

I think that people should be allowed to keep guns for 2 reasons and 2 reasons only. The first is obvious if you live anywhere that isnt a desert or beach. Hunting. People have the right to hunt their own meat, assuming that it's legal in your state and the game is in season. The second reason is for self defense, but exclusively inside your own house. I think you should be able to keep a handgun, shotgun, or rifle in your house for the purpose of defending yourself and your family, but you shouldnt be able to take it outside of your home without a high level permit [such as a concealed weapons permit, but harder to get. government wouldnt hand them out without a good reason.]

 

[GBJoker]

I think that people should be allowed to keep guns for 2 reasons and 2 reasons only. The first is obvious if you live anywhere that isnt a desert or beach. Hunting. People have the right to hunt their own meat, assuming that it's legal in your state and the game is in season. The second reason is for self defense, but exclusively inside your own house. I think you should be able to keep a handgun, shotgun, or rifle in your house for the purpose of defending yourself and your family, but you shouldnt be able to take it outside of your home without a high level permit [such as a concealed weapons permit, but harder to get. government wouldnt hand them out without a good reason.]

What about protection from the government?

You can have 100 million people protest, but in the long run, it means nothing unless you can physically hurt or kill members of the government. It's the only way to stop tyranny, like what happened in the 1750s.

 

[Altair]

I think that we need gun control, but in moderation. There should be backround checks and systems in place so that criminals & terrorists and people of the sort shouldn't be able to get a gun. Also a psychological evaluation to make sure that mentally unstable people don't get guns.

I believe that if the second amendment says that we have the right to bear arms than i say yes let us do it, but please within reason.

 

[Sum1sgruj]

It's very easy to get a gun in America. Most other countries, especially modernized ones such as England or Japan, guns are harder to come by. I think you should have to be 21 years old, have a psych evaluation and not have any felonies. I disagree with other things though. Like, you shouldn't have to have a CWP to conceal weapons, and you shouldn't have to take classes. It's just plain stupid. Those things were made for the the states to bring in more money. They serve no purpose other than screwing someone because of displacing of a weapon. Does it matter either way when it's pointed at your face?