Gun Control - The Debate, Argument Or Whatever ...

[Nature Boy]

I've read a lot about gun control, know quite a bit so I will chime in. I will warn you there isn't a whole lot of gray area in my opinion. Obviously, I support the 2nd Amendment and by the way (talkin to you Clinton News Network) it has nothing to do with forming militias. Regarding the 2nd amendment the following awesome guys banned all weapons from the populaces they governed: hitler, stalin, pol pot, mao.

Now, a few facts for the people who don't know any facts about USA gun deaths. First off, 2/3 are suicides. Of the remaining 3rd, the majority (last I checked) are gang related. Chiraq alone has a huge percentage. Regarding the "laws". Chiraq has among the toughest, maybe top 6 in the USA for tough gun laws. They had approx. 3500 shooting last year. Thus, these laws don't work and the thugs do not follow laws by definition. NOW, here's the key point that rarely gets discussed: Why don't they enforce the laws that are on the books now to the full extent of those laws? Let me guess why? Most all of these cities are run by the left. Thus, even if you pass more and tougher gun laws they won't ENFORCE the laws anyway. Make it 20 years, no parole, no exceptions. But of course they can't do that to these people, having the rough childhoods they had and all. So, in summary, you simply disarm the law abiding citizens and let the thugs run free. That's why gun free zones have the highest crime almost always and Plano, TX (which is the gun owning capital of the USA) has the lowest or close to.

So, what to do about this? First off, screen for mental illness and when found do something about it. Not really sure there is anyway to do anything about single moms trying to raise boys. But what you can do is make it punitive to have illegal guns. It's not punitive, it's not even a scare. So, please explain to me based on my facts above how disarming the law abiding gun owner and making them defenseless is going to help one iota.

 

[tarbe]

Obviously, I support the 2nd Amendment and by the way (talkin to you Clinton News Network) it has nothing to do with forming militias.

Based on your above statement, it appears I need to be educated.

The plain reading of the 2nd Amendment says, to me, that the right of the people to keep and bear arms secures the free state by way of the presence of a well-regulated militia...made possible by the arming of the people.

The founders were leary of a standing army, as they had seen such used too often to subjugate the people. They preferred a militia, from among the people.

What have I got wrong here?

 

[sestoppelman]

Tarbe, I don't think you and Nature Boy actually disagree but for semantics possibly. The Founders meant as I understand it for the "militia" to be "all of the people" as opposed to a regular troop situation. The Founders meant for "the people" to be armed, and further to be armed with the same weaponry as held by govt troops, and the same would apply today. The purpose of an armed populace is two fold, to protect the state from foreign threat, and more importantly from domestic threat I think we can all agree on that.

 

[Nature Boy]

Based on your above statement, it appears I need to be educated.

The plain reading of the 2nd Amendment says, to me, that the right of the people to keep and bear arms secures the free state by way of the presence of a well-regulated militia...made possible by the arming of the people.

The founders were leary of a standing army, as they had seen such used too often to subjugate the people. They preferred a militia, from among the people.

What have I got wrong here?

Well, nothing in what you posted. But if you really read in depth what the Founders thought the main reason to have the 2nd Amendment was to protect the populace from tyrannical government. That is clear in my view.

 

[Nature Boy]

Tarbe, I don't think you and Nature Boy actually disagree but for semantics possibly. The Founders meant as I understand it for the "militia" to be "all of the people" as opposed to a regular troop situation. The Founders meant for "the people" to be armed, and further to be armed with the same weaponry as held by govt troops, and the same would apply today. The purpose of an armed populace is two fold, to protect the state from foreign threat, and more importantly from domestic threat I think we can all agree on that.

That is correct. They wanted the people to be able to protect themselves from a tyrannical government. That is clear.

 

[Nature Boy]

The reality of the situation for me is also very clear. You'll simply be standing there defenseless and won't be able to protect yourself.

 

[Saul]

Over the years, I have become much more of a second amendment absolutist, especially after educating myself in the racism on which many gun control laws were based.

 

[tarbe]

Well, nothing in what you posted. But if you really read in depth what the Founders thought the main reason to have the 2nd Amendment was to protect the populace from tyrannical government. That is clear in my view.

No doubt. But it was through the ability to put together a "well-regulated militia" that the protection would emanate. Armed citizens is the root, and the trunk is the militia.

They understood that without training, discipline and a semblance of standards, the armed populace would not provide the sort of protection needed.

You only have to read the requirements set forth back in the day, to see this. In order to be a member of the militia you were required to maintain so many flints, so much powder and ball, and drill with the other members on a periodic basis.

To separate the militia from the right to keep and bear arms is to twist the history of the 2A.

 

[Nature Boy]

Over the years, I have become much more of a second amendment absolutist, especially after educating myself in the racism on which many gun control laws were based.

Care to expound?

 

[Saul]

Care to expound?

The first gun control laws were put in place to keep blacks unarmed in the south after the Civil War. Gun laws continued to have racist motivations, including concealed carry laws that allowed local sheriffs to deny permits to people "not of upstanding moral character" (read black). Gun laws that target urban populations disproportionately affect poor black communities, leaving them unable to defend their families.

I highly recommend that you watch the documentary "Assaulted: Civil Rights Under Fire." It is available for free on Amazon Prime right now. It does a great job of tracing the racist and unconstitutional history of gun control laws. It is also narrated by Ice-T.

 

[AfricaHunting.com]

I highly recommend that you watch the documentary "Assaulted: Civil Rights Under Fire." It is available for free on Amazon Prime right now. It does a great job of tracing the racist and unconstitutional history of gun control laws. It is also narrated by Ice-T.

 

[Nature Boy]

The first gun control laws were put in place to keep blacks unarmed in the south after the Civil War. Gun laws continued to have racist motivations, including concealed carry laws that allowed local sheriffs to deny permits to people "not of upstanding moral character" (read black). Gun laws that target urban populations disproportionately affect poor black communities, leaving them unable to defend their families.

I highly recommend that you watch the documentary "Assaulted: Civil Rights Under Fire." It is available for free on Amazon Prime right now. It does a great job of tracing the racist and unconstitutional history of gun control laws. It is also narrated by Ice-T.

I will check it out. Thanks

 

[Nature Boy]

Hi Jerome,

Not sure if this is the place to ask so feel free to delete if this is not okay. That said, what are your thoughts on safety for American/foreign hunters in South Africa at the moment? We get a bit of info but nothing I would call thorough. thanks

 

[AfricaHunting.com]

Hi Jerome,

Not sure if this is the place to ask so feel free to delete if this is not okay. That said, what are your thoughts on safety for American/foreign hunters in South Africa at the moment? We get a bit of info but nothing I would call thorough. thanks

I would suggest posting your questions in your own thread so that all members can reply to it and so that everyone can learn and benefit from the answers as well, thx.

 

[Nature Boy]

I would suggest posting your questions in your own thread so that all members can reply to it and so that everyone can learn and benefit from the answers as well, thx.

ok, thanks.

 

[Royal27]

Pretty interesting....

If this is even half way correct it certainly supports the old Goebbels quote about if you tell a big enough lie repeatedly, people will believe it.

 

[tarbe]

I wonder if the "good Professor" still has a job teaching our young adults?

 

[cagkt3]

I wonder if the "good Professor" still has a job teaching our young adults?

Yep...
https://cj.ua.edu/profiles/adam-lankford/

 

[tarbe]

Yep...
https://cj.ua.edu/profiles/adam-lankford/

Grrrrrrrr

 

[Royal27]

The more I thought about it , the more sense it makes. How many other countries have the data access we do here in the States? Not many...