steve03 wrote:
Like all those tough Texas cops in Uvalde Cowering tin the hallway with their BIG guns while babies and teachers are being k**led by one teenager with a gun? Sex traffickers should be punished the maximum permitted by law and their Johns should also get maximum time, but there is no excuse for letting the bloodbath of our children continue. I would think that by now you would have figured out by now a good guy with a gun very rarely stops a bad guy with a gun and usually it's too late. More guns won't solve the problem of mass murder in our streets. There are more guns than people in the USA, if guns could solve the problem it would have happened by now.
Like all those tough Texas cops in Uvalde Cowering... (
show quote)
The DEMOKKKRAPS don't want armed people protecting us. That's why they want to DEFUND the police. We need mandatory death penalties and very long
penalties with lesser infractions.
Frank T wrote:
Who is my, "brethren", or for that matter, my "guys"?
Please tell me, who you think they are and I'll let you know if you're right or not.
More than your share of black trash.
Frank T wrote:
Nothing makes me more safe than a beer drinking redneck with a gun.
Really. No good can come of this.
No rednecks in NYC. They wouldn't want to be around people like you. They definitely have more class than you by far.
JohnFrim wrote:
Yet the 2A for a lot of "gunslingers" is all about fighting the tyranny of your own government. And somehow that morphed into protecting your property, self defence, and stand your ground... all of which are used as justification to own -- and carry -- so many weapons needlessly.
Never "morphed", was always about your natural right to protect yourself and your family that you were born with... no matter where or by whom that threat comes from. The biggest mass murderers have always been governements.
The 2nd grants no right(s), it prohibits the government from passing laws that restrict a natural right all humans are born with.
Firearms fall under this- but note that in other advanced "civilized" countries... no matter what you do or use to protect yourself, you can be found guilty of breaking the law by merely defending yourself. Even against an attacker who has broken into your own home, you need to not exceed the threat they pose- even though you have no idea or way of knowing in the split seconds you have to react...... it's up to you to determine and measure this. Or its is you who will end up in jail.
Checkmate wrote:
More than your share of black trash.
Checky,
Better review your answer. Your r****m is showing.
JohnFrim
Loc: Somewhere in the Great White North.
RichieC wrote:
The 2nd grants no right(s), it prohibits the government from passing laws that restrict a natural right all humans are born with.
Firearms fall under this- but note that in other advanced "civilized" countries... no matter what you do or use to protect yourself, you can be found guilty of breaking the law by merely defending yourself. Even against an attacker who has broken into your own home, you need to not exceed the threat they pose- even though you have no idea or way of knowing in the split seconds you have to react...... it's up to you to determine and measure this. Or its is you who will end up in jail.
The 2nd grants no right(s), it prohibits the gover... (
show quote)
I agree that 2A does not grant rights; rather it imposes restrictions on government.
AND, I agree that everyone has a natural right to protect oneself.
But how does that right of self-protection t***slate into everyone carrying a gun? If no one had guns then you would be protecting yourself with your fists, or sticks, or stones,... or maybe a knife. Guns provide standoff protection, but also standoff assault; and that is the crux of the problem.
Other countries seem to have found a way to survive without the need for everyone to be armed, and the statistics show that the US is an anomaly. Does that not resonate with you?
JohnFrim wrote:
I agree that 2A does not grant rights; rather it imposes restrictions on government.
AND, I agree that everyone has a natural right to protect oneself.
But how does that right of self-protection t***slate into everyone carrying a gun? If no one had guns then you would be protecting yourself with your fists, or sticks, or stones,... or maybe a knife. Guns provide standoff protection, but also standoff assault; and that is the crux of the problem.
Other countries seem to have found a way to survive without the need for everyone to be armed, and the statistics show that the US is an anomaly. Does that not resonate with you?
I agree that 2A does not grant rights; rather it i... (
show quote)
Guns are not the problem. People who carry guns are the problem.
Look at the maturity level of some of the people that post on this site and then think, "do you want them to carry a gun?".
Yet, every time that someone is murdered by a gun-carrying miscreant, all I hear from the right is that we need to carry guns to protect ourselves from people who carry guns.
Americans, have got to be the dumbest people on earth, if they think this makes sense.
Frank T wrote:
Checky,
Better review your answer. Your r****m is showing.
Not r****m butthead. Just T***H. God you are one stupid ahple.
Checkmate wrote:
Not r****m butthead. Just T***H. God you are one stupid ahple.
All r****ts think they are speaking the t***h.
If the hood fits, wear it.
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.