Is the 'right to bear arms' unlimited?

Discussion in 'Gun Control' started by chris155au, Nov 10, 2020.

  1. Kal'Stang

    Kal'Stang Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2015
    Messages:
    4,932
    Likes Received:
    3,831
    Trophy Points:
    113
    According to the following links New Hampshire has the lowest homicide rate in the US, but also receives an F in gun law restrictions.

    LINK: Crime Rate by State
    url=https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/strictest-gun-laws-by-state]LINK: Strictest Gun Laws by State[/url]

    North Dakota is second in lowest homicide rate, also with an F in gun law restrictions.
    Then comes Maine in third, also with an F in gun law restrictions.
    4th place is Idaho, also with an F.
    5th is Rhode Island, but they get a B+ in gun law restrictions.
    6th is Minnesota, they get a C+.
    7th is Nebraska, which gets a C.
    8th is Vermont, which gets a C-.
    9th is Utah, which gets a D.
    10 is Massachusetts, which gets a A-.
     
  2. Kal'Stang

    Kal'Stang Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2015
    Messages:
    4,932
    Likes Received:
    3,831
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Its well known that criminals will vote with the more liberal party. So trying to tie them into the conservative party isn't going to work.

    It is interesting that you deny that they are people just like you. Goes to show that you are dehumanizing them.
     
  3. Kal'Stang

    Kal'Stang Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2015
    Messages:
    4,932
    Likes Received:
    3,831
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Self defense requires the need of guns.
     
  4. dagosa

    dagosa Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2010
    Messages:
    16,881
    Likes Received:
    3,973
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Let’s see the proof.
     
  5. dagosa

    dagosa Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2010
    Messages:
    16,881
    Likes Received:
    3,973
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Not in Norway with such a low gun violence rate.
     
    CCitizen likes this.
  6. dagosa

    dagosa Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2010
    Messages:
    16,881
    Likes Received:
    3,973
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I don’t know where you’re getting this sht. Do you personally know a large enough sample of criminals ? Take your pick from the republican administrations. They out number Dems 100 plus to one.
     
  7. dagosa

    dagosa Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2010
    Messages:
    16,881
    Likes Received:
    3,973
    Trophy Points:
    113
    https://www.livescience.com/13083-criminals-brain-neuroscience-ethics.html

    What science says.....you’re wrong, again.

    I don’t hang with criminals. In the Trumps Conservative circle of friends it may be true....not with normal,people.
     
  8. dagosa

    dagosa Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2010
    Messages:
    16,881
    Likes Received:
    3,973
    Trophy Points:
    113
    It’s not a human right to own a firearm. That’s a bogus idea.
     
  9. dagosa

    dagosa Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2010
    Messages:
    16,881
    Likes Received:
    3,973
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The criminal mind at work.
     
  10. cristiansoldier

    cristiansoldier Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2014
    Messages:
    1,734
    Likes Received:
    1,117
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I think from the founding fathers point of view it is meant to be unlimited.
     
  11. TOG 6

    TOG 6 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2015
    Messages:
    39,805
    Likes Received:
    13,854
    Trophy Points:
    113
    "Arms" as the term is used in the 2nd does not include nuclear weapons.
    How does the fact you cannot own a nuclear weapon mean the right protected by the 2nd is limited?
     
  12. dagosa

    dagosa Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2010
    Messages:
    16,881
    Likes Received:
    3,973
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ha ha.
    Hence the phrase, “on average.” You seem to put all your chickens in statistically invalid states with fewer then a million people. Maine, Idaho and North Dakota. That’s laughable. All three have fewer then half the people in NYC.
     
  13. dagosa

    dagosa Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2010
    Messages:
    16,881
    Likes Received:
    3,973
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Nope. As early as the late 1700s, the first gun regulations were established. Of course, back then, the second amendment applied only to the militia. So during our founding fathers time, there was no constitutional personal right to bear arms. None, nada, nix

    https://www.usnews.com/news/best-st...-laws-linked-to-less-gun-violence-study-finds
     
    Last edited: Nov 27, 2020
  14. cristiansoldier

    cristiansoldier Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2014
    Messages:
    1,734
    Likes Received:
    1,117
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Sure but the idea was the standing militia was suppose to protect our rights and freedoms. The founding fathers did not want a professional army paid for by the government. That was the role of the militia which meant those should have access to any arms necessary to fulfill that role.
     
  15. Kal'Stang

    Kal'Stang Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2015
    Messages:
    4,932
    Likes Received:
    3,831
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Tell you what, learn to quote properly with everything a person says in one post in your reply post instead of stretched out between several of your posts and I'll provide evidence. Getting 9 notifications for you quoting the same post is annoying and I'm not going to bother to respond to each one over multiple posts. If you can't do this then I'm not going to bother to respond anymore. Keep things in context.
     
  16. dagosa

    dagosa Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2010
    Messages:
    16,881
    Likes Received:
    3,973
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I see your going off on a tangent. So, you have no proof.
     
    Last edited: Nov 27, 2020
  17. dagosa

    dagosa Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2010
    Messages:
    16,881
    Likes Received:
    3,973
    Trophy Points:
    113
    So you agree. The original intent of the 2a was to have an armed militia to protect our constitutionally mandated basic rights. It has nothing then to do with the personal right to own a firearm,....
     
  18. dagosa

    dagosa Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2010
    Messages:
    16,881
    Likes Received:
    3,973
    Trophy Points:
    113
    This any

    better
     
  19. Polydectes

    Polydectes Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2010
    Messages:
    33,908
    Likes Received:
    8,549
    Trophy Points:
    113
    By not being allowed to own nuclear arms. There are limits to all liberties. For example a limit on the freedom of speech is you can't slander people.
     
    CCitizen likes this.
  20. chris155au

    chris155au Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2017
    Messages:
    26,292
    Likes Received:
    2,536
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Not that they could possibly have known the types of weapons that would exist down the track.
     
    dagosa likes this.
  21. chris155au

    chris155au Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2017
    Messages:
    26,292
    Likes Received:
    2,536
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    What does injury have to do with speech?
     
    Last edited: Nov 28, 2020
  22. chris155au

    chris155au Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2017
    Messages:
    26,292
    Likes Received:
    2,536
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Any examples?

    And what do you think of those?

    Why do you specify "right wing terrorist groups" as if left-wing terrorism and other forms of terrorism doesn't exist?
     
    Last edited: Nov 28, 2020
    CCitizen likes this.
  23. Polydectes

    Polydectes Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2010
    Messages:
    33,908
    Likes Received:
    8,549
    Trophy Points:
    113
    That's an odd question.
     
  24. chris155au

    chris155au Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2017
    Messages:
    26,292
    Likes Received:
    2,536
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Do you mean physical injury?
     
  25. Polydectes

    Polydectes Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2010
    Messages:
    33,908
    Likes Received:
    8,549
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Not necessarily. You can't slander someone because that causes injury not bodily harm.
     

Share This Page