There is already prevention, but those laws are not being enforced, they are dumped over because some idiot comes up with a new way to try to help, but those new ways only infringe on the rights of honest people. There are laws on the books RIGHT NOW, that if implemented correctly, would not affect the honest man, and would help (not solve, you can never keep guns out of the bad man's hands) things out some.

__________________
The National Science Foundation announced the following study results on U.S. military recreation preferences:
1. Sport of choice for Marines: bowling.
2. Sport of choice for Sailors: football.
3. Sport of choice for Soldiers: baseball.
4. Sport of choice for Coast Guardsmen: tennis.
5. Sport of choice for Airmen: golf.
Notice how the farther down the list you go, the smaller their balls get.

Golly... So what you’re saying here is, in effect, that you don't understand what a principle is OR you do know and you sought to avoid the discussion of your ignorance through the above distraction?

We already understood your 'feelings' on the militia; that wasn't the question.

The question was WHAT CHANGES HAVE OCCURRED IN THE PRINCIPLE WHICH PROVIDE THE RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS... You see sis, the right to bear arms preceded the US Constitution. It preceded the fledgling United States at the time the legal protections found in the amendment were added to the Constitution. The 2nd amendment merely noted the right and gave an example in reasoning for the necessity of the protections; it did this in order to remind future generations of THEIR RESPONSIBILITY TO ENSURE GOVERNMENT WAS NOT ALLOWED TO BECOME TYRANNICAL.

Now again... What changes in the right to bear arms have occurred which make it necessary to remove the protections?

For instance; do you feel that the individual is no longer responsible for their own security? Is it your feelings that you are not obligated to see to your own defense? Has something occurred which you feel resolves you of the sacred responsibility to protect yourself?

Do not trot this inane red herring out again... as to do so will be a default concession on your part that this position of yours is nonsense of the lowest order.

NO... Ya don't.

The reasoning for the protections, is offered as a reminder to future generations of the obligations inherent from the RIGHT.

For instance... let's try this:

"Being necessary to the entertainment of the people, the right to keep and read books shall not be infringed"

Now today very few people read books for entertainment. So would you argue that this should be used as reasoning for stripping us of our right to keep and read books?

Sure... you can argue that some people still read for entertainment, but they are such a stark minority that the protection is no longer relevant. You may also argue that books are used for other purposes, such as education and keeping of records… but when you do so you argue the right, not the reasoning established in example for the protection represented in the amendment.

The same is true in the 2nd amendment; the right to keep and bear arms is essential in the individual’s means to protect themselves; thus the collective: ‘The People” are protected through that immutable principle.

let me clarify myself. The people should still have the right to a non-tyrannical and the right of protection, but using firearms seems to be quite inconvenient... So let me ask you a question. Is the only way to ensure a non-tyrannical government and to ensure protection to allow people to carry guns? It seems that the 2nd amendment, as you explain it, is symbolic of a deeper right, which is a non-tyrannical and a government that's not omnipotent. Bearing arms was different 250 years ago. What they used to prevent an overpowerful government THEN, may not be as useful for that NOW. There are many many things now that there were not 250 years ago. The right to bear arms, once again as you explained it, is metaphorical for a right of protection and a fair government. These two things are achievable in ways other than allowing citizens to carry weapons that kill more than 50,000 people a year.

I have, several times asked you what is a better way to protect yourself. But as of yet I have not seen an answer come from you. Can you please give me one?

__________________
The National Science Foundation announced the following study results on U.S. military recreation preferences:
1. Sport of choice for Marines: bowling.
2. Sport of choice for Sailors: football.
3. Sport of choice for Soldiers: baseball.
4. Sport of choice for Coast Guardsmen: tennis.
5. Sport of choice for Airmen: golf.
Notice how the farther down the list you go, the smaller their balls get.

So you can't actually cite a change in the principle on which the 2nd amendment rests...

The People Rest...

Friends, there is no better wayon this earth to defend yourself from tyranny than through superior fire power. PERIOD.

These people that want to concede their right to defend themselves need to recognize that this is a point which will never be conceded by Americans. It is the point at which the next US revolution will begin. Like mono-gender marriage, there is no negotiation here, no room for concession and it will be the radical that wins. I'm just such a radical friends and of my peers within this group, I'm the reasonable one.

Where on concedes their responsibility to defend their life, they concede their right to life and that is not a point in which their can be a compromise. Either a right to life exists, then it must inherently come with the responsibility to defend it. There is no better way to do so than to possess the means to end the lives of those who seek to take it from you.

Any questions?

better ways to protect yourself: pepper spray, martial arts, better home security, watch dog, etc.

There is no change in the principle of which the 2nd amendment rests. The PRINCIPLE is the same, but there are other ways to ensure this right. The principle on which the 2nd amendment was written was that the people must be able to "check" the government's power. The 2nd amendment was created to protect the people, but thousands of people are dying in a year because of it. THERE ARE OTHER WAYS TO STOP THE GOVERNMENT FROM BEING TOO POWERFUL!

All explained in detail in this thread. Please come back when you have something as reliable as shooting them dead!

http://www.wickedlocal.com/somervill...ive/x370372251

That is 14% military grade OC spray at a level one spray (4.6 million SHU). DO you want to trust your life to that?

__________________
The National Science Foundation announced the following study results on U.S. military recreation preferences:
1. Sport of choice for Marines: bowling.
2. Sport of choice for Sailors: football.
3. Sport of choice for Soldiers: baseball.
4. Sport of choice for Coast Guardsmen: tennis.
5. Sport of choice for Airmen: golf.
Notice how the farther down the list you go, the smaller their balls get.

I think most people would be scared of somebody who could do that.

Ok, first please read the thread I linked to.

Now imagine you were the big bald guy.

Now imagine this guy just broke in your house and has distance on you.


Do you see a problem yet?

Additionally, it takes years of practice to become proficient at a martial art. It is not something that you can take a few classes on, then be qualified to defend your home with.

Why do people always forget that wolves will never give up their fangs?

__________________
The National Science Foundation announced the following study results on U.S. military recreation preferences:
1. Sport of choice for Marines: bowling.
2. Sport of choice for Sailors: football.
3. Sport of choice for Soldiers: baseball.
4. Sport of choice for Coast Guardsmen: tennis.
5. Sport of choice for Airmen: golf.
Notice how the farther down the list you go, the smaller their balls get.