I like this one.Varegg wrote:
*A doctor must declare you mentally fit to own a gun !
gun owning is a right, not a privilege like driving.Kmarion wrote:
All, with rights comes responsibility.
why do Europeans want to change US gun law so much??
Scared someones gonna shoot you while you're visiting the Grand Canyon or something? You should be more worried about your neighbor Russia and your own problems.
They should start by enforcing current gun law before making new ones.
Scared someones gonna shoot you while you're visiting the Grand Canyon or something? You should be more worried about your neighbor Russia and your own problems.
They should start by enforcing current gun law before making new ones.
True... But in hindsight, perhaps it should be a privilege.The_Mac wrote:
gun owning is a right, not a privilege like driving.Kmarion wrote:
All, with rights comes responsibility.
Also, in hindsight, there should have been a Bill of Responsibilities to accompany the Bill of Rights.
Think you missed the whole point Heimdal, what i`m most interested in knowing is the mentality behind the unwillingness to update an old amendment that was written under entirely different circumstances and might have suited the situation then but pr date doesn`t.HeimdalX wrote:
why do Europeans want to change US gun law so much??
Scared someones gonna shoot you while you're visiting the Grand Canyon or something? You should be more worried about your neighbor Russia and your own problems.
They should start by enforcing current gun law before making new ones.
All laws and amendments must change accordingly to meet the demands of today, isn`t any of the other amendments been ratified or new ones been adapted since the founding fathers wrote them ?
To me it looks like this particular amendment is so sacred it almost hurts just to talk about it for some people.
Wait behind the line ..............................................................
its a part of this country....its how we won our freedom.
im not worried about shawnees coming to attack, nor a foreign country invading.
but it is something our forefathers thought that we needed.....they are literally part of our society. so much a part, they could never be taken, or some serious problems would arise.
im not worried about shawnees coming to attack, nor a foreign country invading.
but it is something our forefathers thought that we needed.....they are literally part of our society. so much a part, they could never be taken, or some serious problems would arise.
Our government has been slowly chipping away at our rights for many years now and it amazes me to see people so willing to give them up. Some of the Democrats in power right now (i.e. Pelosi, Kerry, Schummer, Blanco, etc...) and republicans (Rommney, Mccain) have come out at one time or another and said that if they could take all the guns away today they would. John McCain may not have gone that far but he is no friend of the second amendment. They don't just want certain types of guns, that is only a start. Once they get the .50 cal's they will move down to the 7.62 x 51 or .308 untill they get my 10/22. I am going to fight against this untill they take away my super soaker.
Why is it that the Brady Campaign gives Cities grades on their gunlaws and what do you know, Washington D.C. got and A even though they had one of the highest rates of gun crime in the nation. They gave Montanna an F for their gun laws since they encated a right to carry law and the gun crime dropped something like 40% in 2005. Taken from my biased NRA magazine.
My only gripe is that the second amendment should be switched with the first amendment. I have read a few times that many of our founding fathers thought the second amendment should have been first.
Bill of Rights----All of these are or should be sacred to every American.
Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
Amendment II
A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.
Amendment III
No soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.
Amendment IV
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Amendment V
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
Amendment VI
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.
Amendment VII
In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise reexamined in any court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.
Amendment VIII
Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.
Amendment IX
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
Amendment X
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.
Why is it that the Brady Campaign gives Cities grades on their gunlaws and what do you know, Washington D.C. got and A even though they had one of the highest rates of gun crime in the nation. They gave Montanna an F for their gun laws since they encated a right to carry law and the gun crime dropped something like 40% in 2005. Taken from my biased NRA magazine.
My only gripe is that the second amendment should be switched with the first amendment. I have read a few times that many of our founding fathers thought the second amendment should have been first.
Bill of Rights----All of these are or should be sacred to every American.
Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
Amendment II
A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.
Amendment III
No soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.
Amendment IV
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Amendment V
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
Amendment VI
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.
Amendment VII
In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise reexamined in any court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.
Amendment VIII
Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.
Amendment IX
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
Amendment X
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.
Last edited by JG1567JG (2007-05-06 06:03:58)
And in what way are you willing to fight for those rights ?
Is it possible that the 2nd amendment will be polictly abolished or will they just adjust it to where they don`t see the necessity of owning high caliber guns for self-defence ?
Good post btw
Is it possible that the 2nd amendment will be polictly abolished or will they just adjust it to where they don`t see the necessity of owning high caliber guns for self-defence ?
Good post btw
Wait behind the line ..............................................................
I vote for the politician that I think will take the least amount away or intrude in my life the least amount.
It is already happening. They will try to ban certain calibers or style of weapons and when they get that done they will turn around and go after the exact same guns they said were OK before and they were not after.
I am also a firm believer that our second amendment right is here to stop our government from getting too out of control. Many people say that the average citizen wouldn't be able to stand up to our modern military with tanks and planes but the question is how many of those soldiers would actually use that equipment on their own countrymen?
I must go to bed now since I work nights. I'll check back later today or tomorrow
It is already happening. They will try to ban certain calibers or style of weapons and when they get that done they will turn around and go after the exact same guns they said were OK before and they were not after.
I am also a firm believer that our second amendment right is here to stop our government from getting too out of control. Many people say that the average citizen wouldn't be able to stand up to our modern military with tanks and planes but the question is how many of those soldiers would actually use that equipment on their own countrymen?
I must go to bed now since I work nights. I'll check back later today or tomorrow
1. And what happens if the state shuts down their gun club?Varegg wrote:
What could be done with the existing gun laws on restrictions and alterations without hurting your rights given by the 2nd amendment ?
1. You would have to be a member of an state approved gun club and attend a minimum of meetings pr year to keep your membership !
2. You must apply for a certificate for each caliber gun you want to by !
3. The ATF must register a ballistic test of your gun before you are issued the certificate, like a gun fingerprint database !
4. You must acquire a hunting licence to buy a rifle !
5. You must attend a test showing you are capable of handling the gun before the certificate is issued !
6. Special permits for collectors !
7. A doctor must declare you mentally fit to own a gun !
*A variation of all of the above !
2. Why? Just make the permit requirements more strict all around, because you can kill as easily with a .38 as a .45.
3. A machine shop could alter that as easily as pulling on a latex glove.
4. The point being? What if you'd rather just buy meat, but still want to go out every other weekend to an outdoor range for long-range target practice? You can hunt with certain handgun, too.
5. I agree.
6. The point being? You don't require a permit to collect household chemicals, and look what can be done with those. A hardware store won't even look at you twice if you buy certain sets of them.
7. As long as you aren't declared mentally-unsound just because your ex-wife didn't like being yelled at once.
1. If the state shuts down a gunclub they would prolly have a very good reason.unnamednewbie13 wrote:
1. And what happens if the state shuts down their gun club?
2. Why? Just make the permit requirements more strict all around, because you can kill as easily with a .38 as a .45.
3. A machine shop could alter that as easily as pulling on a latex glove.
4. The point being? What if you'd rather just buy meat, but still want to go out every other weekend to an outdoor range for long-range target practice? You can hunt with certain handgun, too.
5. I agree.
6. The point being? You don't require a permit to collect household chemicals, and look what can be done with those. A hardware store won't even look at you twice if you buy certain sets of them.
7. As long as you aren't declared mentally-unsound just because your ex-wife didn't like being yelled at once.
2. It would make it more difficult to and time consuming to get large amounts of guns that really isn`t needed for personal safety.
3. That may very well be the case, but a criminal with a stolen gun might not take the time to do alterations to a gun he is planning to use in a hold up or for a quick murder.
4. Might not be the best of restrictions i agree but still if you really wan`t a rifle that bad why not, besides a handgun is much more handy for personal safety than a rifle.
5. Goody.
6. A special permit for collectors is one of the means we have in Norway so you can actually own an operational heavy machine gun from lets say WW2.
7. That`s why such doctors should get a state approval from lets say ATF to do such evaluations.
Last edited by Varegg (2007-05-06 11:35:32)
Wait behind the line ..............................................................
what a absurd reponse, oh well I have come to expect it. I am a collector. I only have ammo for one. My dogs make me feel safe.wetcroch wrote:
10. I own 37 firearms. Must make you feel 37 times safer than if you only owned 1
I find it most amusing you care so much about governments chipping rights, yet when they bring in laws like the Patriot Act you say it doesn't bother you.JG1567JG wrote:
Our government has been slowly chipping away at our rights for many years now and it amazes me to see people so willing to give them up. Some of the Democrats in power right now (i.e. Pelosi, Kerry, Schummer, Blanco, etc...) and republicans (Rommney, Mccain) have come out at one time or another and said that if they could take all the guns away today they would. John McCain may not have gone that far but he is no friend of the second amendment. They don't just want certain types of guns, that is only a start. Once they get the .50 cal's they will move down to the 7.62 x 51 or .308 untill they get my 10/22. I am going to fight against this untill they take away my super soaker.
That is bull. Your apparently against guns because you cant have them where you live at. All of your ideas are outrageous and rediculous.
Varegg wrote:
What could be done with the existing gun laws on restrictions and alterations without hurting your rights given by the 2nd amendment ?
*You would have to be a member of an state approved gun club and attend a minimum of meetings pr year to keep your membership !
*You must apply for a certificate for each caliber gun you want to by !
*The ATF must register a ballistic test of your gun before you are issued the certificate, like a gun fingerprint database !
*You must acquire a hunting licence to buy a rifle !
*You must attend a test showing you are capable of handling the gun before the certificate is issued !
*Special permits for collectors !
*A doctor must declare you mentally fit to own a gun !
*A variation of all of the above !
Americans can take on a lot when our people are in danger Blood drives, Fuel and food rationing. We are smart enough to watch our leaders very carefully, as they work for us. You know Ti Ti of the patriot act.
Well it doesn't affect me. If I have a pistol and they make a law banning them, that does. I've yet to even know of anyone (though I haven't been looking) for people arrested with the Patriot Act so I don't care. Even if they were looking at me directly, I'm not doing anything illegal or anything that can be construed or misconstrued as aiding terrorists, just going with my routine and living my life.ghettoperson wrote:
I find it most amusing you care so much about governments chipping rights, yet when they bring in laws like the Patriot Act you say it doesn't bother you.
When did I say it doesn't matter to me. I know very little abut the patriot act as do many others. The only part of the is that it allowes some wiretaps on people that the government suspects of Terrorism.ghettoperson wrote:
I find it most amusing you care so much about governments chipping rights, yet when they bring in laws like the Patriot Act you say it doesn't bother you.JG1567JG wrote:
Our government has been slowly chipping away at our rights for many years now and it amazes me to see people so willing to give them up. Some of the Democrats in power right now (i.e. Pelosi, Kerry, Schummer, Blanco, etc...) and republicans (Rommney, Mccain) have come out at one time or another and said that if they could take all the guns away today they would. John McCain may not have gone that far but he is no friend of the second amendment. They don't just want certain types of guns, that is only a start. Once they get the .50 cal's they will move down to the 7.62 x 51 or .308 untill they get my 10/22. I am going to fight against this untill they take away my super soaker.
Now in another thread people were slamming the NRA for being against a bill that would stop gun sales to these suspected terrorist, but what if after 5 years of investigation the guy is no longer suspected for this reason or that. That would be five years that this guy was denied his civil rights. What the NRA is against is punishing someone by taken away their rights when they have done nothing wrong.
Last edited by JG1567JG (2007-05-06 13:30:15)
The Patriot Act bothers a lot of people, the amount of people against it is growing, although slowly. A lot of people take the second amendment being infringed a lot more seriously than other rights because it takes away the ability to fight back against the government if need be.ghettoperson wrote:
I find it most amusing you care so much about governments chipping rights, yet when they bring in laws like the Patriot Act you say it doesn't bother you.
"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government"
-- Thomas Jefferson
"This country, with its institutions, belongs to the people who inhabit it. Whenever they shall grow weary of the existing government, they can exercise their constitutional right of amending it or their revolutionary right to dismember it or overthrow it."
-- Abraham Lincoln
"That the said Constitution shall never be construed to authorize Congress to infringe the just liberty of the press or the rights of conscience; or to prevent the people of the United states who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms..."
-- Samuel Adams
"Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable."
-- John F. Kennedy
Most Americans understand this, I know in Europe you guys don't. You haven't. Ever. Look how many times other countries have conquered you. I pity the country that attacks the US with anything less than nuclear arms, and I pity the government who tries to remove this right even more.
You might say how are you going to fight against your large, well equipped government? We did once before, it was called the Revolutionary war. When democracy fails, the gun rules.
And Varegg, "*Special permits for collectors !"
We already have that. It's called the Curio & Relic license. Try reading up on a topic before attempting to suggest a better solution.
"*The ATF must register a ballistic test of your gun before you are issued the certificate, like a gun fingerprint database !"
Oh no I stuck a small file in my barrel and made a small scratch. There goes your "fingerprint".
The guy would've been denied his civil rights for five years in any case, whether he was able to buy guns or not. Why is the 4th amendment regarded as something less sacred than the 2nd?JG1567JG wrote:
Now in another thread people were slamming the NRA for being against a bill that would stop gun sales to these suspected terrorist, but what if after 5 years of investigation the guy is no longer suspected for this reason or that. That would be five years that this guy was denied his civil rights. What the NRA is against is punishing someone by taken away their rights when they have done nothing wrong.
I could spend my time on wikipedia if i wanted to read myself silly but that was not my intention with this thread, i really wanted to hear what you guys have to say on the matter and your thoughts on the issue - but with asking those questions i only get shit in return allthough some of you are courteous enough to talk about it in a rational way and i thank those.HeimdalX wrote:
The Patriot Act bothers a lot of people, the amount of people against it is growing, although slowly. A lot of people take the second amendment being infringed a lot more seriously than other rights because it takes away the ability to fight back against the government if need be.ghettoperson wrote:
I find it most amusing you care so much about governments chipping rights, yet when they bring in laws like the Patriot Act you say it doesn't bother you.
"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government"
-- Thomas Jefferson
"This country, with its institutions, belongs to the people who inhabit it. Whenever they shall grow weary of the existing government, they can exercise their constitutional right of amending it or their revolutionary right to dismember it or overthrow it."
-- Abraham Lincoln
"That the said Constitution shall never be construed to authorize Congress to infringe the just liberty of the press or the rights of conscience; or to prevent the people of the United states who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms..."
-- Samuel Adams
"Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable."
-- John F. Kennedy
Most Americans understand this, I know in Europe you guys don't. You haven't. Ever. Look how many times other countries have conquered you. I pity the country that attacks the US with anything less than nuclear arms, and I pity the government who tries to remove this right even more.
You might say how are you going to fight against your large, well equipped government? We did once before, it was called the Revolutionary war. When democracy fails, the gun rules.
And Varegg, "*Special permits for collectors !"
We already have that. It's called the Curio & Relic license. Try reading up on a topic before attempting to suggest a better solution.
"*The ATF must register a ballistic test of your gun before you are issued the certificate, like a gun fingerprint database !"
Oh no I stuck a small file in my barrel and made a small scratch. There goes your "fingerprint".
And if you read the thread carefully i am not suggesting a new gun law, i am trying to raise a debate to understand why you feel so strongly about this because no other country on earth has the same laws or the same attitude for such a particular amendment and i find that interesting and want to learn more about it.
Why not ask the people involved when you have the chance ?
But then again most of you fail terribly at speaking about it, all some of you can do is to copy and paste from the bill of rights and the flaming, the beautiful flaming - are you really that scared of a Norwegian asking questions ?
Wait behind the line ..............................................................
Great ideas for your own countryVaregg wrote:
What could be done with the existing gun laws on restrictions and alterations without hurting your rights given by the 2nd amendment ?
*You would have to be a member of an state approved gun club and attend a minimum of meetings pr year to keep your membership !
*You must apply for a certificate for each caliber gun you want to by !
*The ATF must register a ballistic test of your gun before you are issued the certificate, like a gun fingerprint database !
*You must acquire a hunting licence to buy a rifle !
*You must attend a test showing you are capable of handling the gun before the certificate is issued !
*Special permits for collectors !
*A doctor must declare you mentally fit to own a gun !
*A variation of all of the above !
I`m not against guns at all, i have 15 years in the army handling guns and teaching gun safety to recruits - as part of my state of readyness as an officer in the national guard i had an AG3 and later an MP5 at home for the entire duration of those 15 years.Drunken_Tankdriver wrote:
That is bull. Your apparently against guns because you cant have them where you live at. All of your ideas are outrageous and rediculous.Varegg wrote:
What could be done with the existing gun laws on restrictions and alterations without hurting your rights given by the 2nd amendment ?
*You would have to be a member of an state approved gun club and attend a minimum of meetings pr year to keep your membership !
*You must apply for a certificate for each caliber gun you want to by !
*The ATF must register a ballistic test of your gun before you are issued the certificate, like a gun fingerprint database !
*You must acquire a hunting licence to buy a rifle !
*You must attend a test showing you are capable of handling the gun before the certificate is issued !
*Special permits for collectors !
*A doctor must declare you mentally fit to own a gun !
*A variation of all of the above !
I was a member of a gunclub when i was younger and owned a 22 cal rifle for target practice and later a 9 mm handgun for the same reason.
Pr date i have no guns and dont feel i need one but if i wanted one all i have to do is revive my old membership at the gunclub and apply for whatever gun i want to buy - would take me about 2 - 3 weeks.
So don`t be so wise making up your mind about people you know nothing about, because that`s fucking bull if ask me
Wait behind the line ..............................................................
Some of them apply in Norway yes.TrollmeaT wrote:
Great ideas for your own countryVaregg wrote:
What could be done with the existing gun laws on restrictions and alterations without hurting your rights given by the 2nd amendment ?
*You would have to be a member of an state approved gun club and attend a minimum of meetings pr year to keep your membership !
*You must apply for a certificate for each caliber gun you want to by !
*The ATF must register a ballistic test of your gun before you are issued the certificate, like a gun fingerprint database !
*You must acquire a hunting licence to buy a rifle !
*You must attend a test showing you are capable of handling the gun before the certificate is issued !
*Special permits for collectors !
*A doctor must declare you mentally fit to own a gun !
*A variation of all of the above !
Wait behind the line ..............................................................
I gave examples of some of the reasons why we feel the way about firearms that we do. If you failed to read it, then that's your problem. If you took me quoting previous great leaders of our country as flaming, then go back to kindergarten. If you took me knocking down a few of your ideas about the topic as flaming, then be more open to criticism. You can't just say anyone that disagrees with you is flaming, if I were flaming you I'd call you names in addition to disproving your thoughts and theories.Varegg wrote:
I could spend my time on wikipedia if i wanted to read myself silly but that was not my intention with this thread, i really wanted to hear what you guys have to say on the matter and your thoughts on the issue - but with asking those questions i only get shit in return allthough some of you are courteous enough to talk about it in a rational way and i thank those.HeimdalX wrote:
The Patriot Act bothers a lot of people, the amount of people against it is growing, although slowly. A lot of people take the second amendment being infringed a lot more seriously than other rights because it takes away the ability to fight back against the government if need be.ghettoperson wrote:
I find it most amusing you care so much about governments chipping rights, yet when they bring in laws like the Patriot Act you say it doesn't bother you.
"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government"
-- Thomas Jefferson
"This country, with its institutions, belongs to the people who inhabit it. Whenever they shall grow weary of the existing government, they can exercise their constitutional right of amending it or their revolutionary right to dismember it or overthrow it."
-- Abraham Lincoln
"That the said Constitution shall never be construed to authorize Congress to infringe the just liberty of the press or the rights of conscience; or to prevent the people of the United states who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms..."
-- Samuel Adams
"Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable."
-- John F. Kennedy
Most Americans understand this, I know in Europe you guys don't. You haven't. Ever. Look how many times other countries have conquered you. I pity the country that attacks the US with anything less than nuclear arms, and I pity the government who tries to remove this right even more.
You might say how are you going to fight against your large, well equipped government? We did once before, it was called the Revolutionary war. When democracy fails, the gun rules.
And Varegg, "*Special permits for collectors !"
We already have that. It's called the Curio & Relic license. Try reading up on a topic before attempting to suggest a better solution.
"*The ATF must register a ballistic test of your gun before you are issued the certificate, like a gun fingerprint database !"
Oh no I stuck a small file in my barrel and made a small scratch. There goes your "fingerprint".
And if you read the thread carefully i am not suggesting a new gun law, i am trying to raise a debate to understand why you feel so strongly about this because no other country on earth has the same laws or the same attitude for such a particular amendment and i find that interesting and want to learn more about it.
Why not ask the people involved when you have the chance ?
But then again most of you fail terribly at speaking about it, all some of you can do is to copy and paste from the bill of rights and the flaming, the beautiful flaming - are you really that scared of a Norwegian asking questions ?
Or maybe I should take the same stance as you and say you're flaming America because you offer a voice of dissent to our beliefs. There's this strange thing about America, we may not like what each other say but a lot of us would die for the right to say it.
But, alas, I think you're just trolling. That was a flame, troll.
Well guess who don`t read very well, did i mention you specifically ? .... i said some of you, not you !HeimdalX wrote:
I gave examples of some of the reasons why we feel the way about firearms that we do. If you failed to read it, then that's your problem. If you took me quoting previous great leaders of our country as flaming, then go back to kindergarten. If you took me knocking down a few of your ideas about the topic as flaming, then be more open to criticism. You can't just say anyone that disagrees with you is flaming, if I were flaming you I'd call you names in addition to disproving your thoughts and theories.Varegg wrote:
I could spend my time on wikipedia if i wanted to read myself silly but that was not my intention with this thread, i really wanted to hear what you guys have to say on the matter and your thoughts on the issue - but with asking those questions i only get shit in return allthough some of you are courteous enough to talk about it in a rational way and i thank those.HeimdalX wrote:
The Patriot Act bothers a lot of people, the amount of people against it is growing, although slowly. A lot of people take the second amendment being infringed a lot more seriously than other rights because it takes away the ability to fight back against the government if need be.
"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government"
-- Thomas Jefferson
"This country, with its institutions, belongs to the people who inhabit it. Whenever they shall grow weary of the existing government, they can exercise their constitutional right of amending it or their revolutionary right to dismember it or overthrow it."
-- Abraham Lincoln
"That the said Constitution shall never be construed to authorize Congress to infringe the just liberty of the press or the rights of conscience; or to prevent the people of the United states who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms..."
-- Samuel Adams
"Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable."
-- John F. Kennedy
Most Americans understand this, I know in Europe you guys don't. You haven't. Ever. Look how many times other countries have conquered you. I pity the country that attacks the US with anything less than nuclear arms, and I pity the government who tries to remove this right even more.
You might say how are you going to fight against your large, well equipped government? We did once before, it was called the Revolutionary war. When democracy fails, the gun rules.
And Varegg, "*Special permits for collectors !"
We already have that. It's called the Curio & Relic license. Try reading up on a topic before attempting to suggest a better solution.
"*The ATF must register a ballistic test of your gun before you are issued the certificate, like a gun fingerprint database !"
Oh no I stuck a small file in my barrel and made a small scratch. There goes your "fingerprint".
And if you read the thread carefully i am not suggesting a new gun law, i am trying to raise a debate to understand why you feel so strongly about this because no other country on earth has the same laws or the same attitude for such a particular amendment and i find that interesting and want to learn more about it.
Why not ask the people involved when you have the chance ?
But then again most of you fail terribly at speaking about it, all some of you can do is to copy and paste from the bill of rights and the flaming, the beautiful flaming - are you really that scared of a Norwegian asking questions ?
Or maybe I should take the same stance as you and say you're flaming America because you offer a voice of dissent to our beliefs. There's this strange thing about America, we may not like what each other say but a lot of us would die for the right to say it.
But, alas, I think you're just trolling. That was a flame, troll.
Wait behind the line ..............................................................