|
#121
| ||||
| ||||
| This nutter is from the Great White North eh, and as my knowledge of American history is usually better than most Americans, let me explain something to you. The wording and spirit of the 2nd amendment, as is often the case by close minded people with a cause, is quite conveniently 'amended' to suit their own warped ideas. Lets examine the exact language shall we... 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. Now as most gun nuts only seem to quote chapter and verse on the 'right to keep and bear arms' bit only, they kinda forget the 'well regulated militia to protect the free state' part and so then every yahoo and his brother in law Billy-joe-jim-bob just has to have a pickup truck with a gun rack. So, just for giggles, how about you try to overthrow the tyranny of the Bush administration, as is your constitutionally protected right to do so, and incite a new revolution with your guns and see just how fast Uncle Sam usurps your rights and tosses your can into the nearest maximum security US guest house. |
|
#122
| ||||
| ||||
| And if you have an unfettered right to bear arms why doesn't anyone own a fully functional tank, or an F-18 with all the trimmings? |
|
#123
| |||
| |||
| Let's stick to what has been interpreted by the Supreme Court - the right is independent from the formation of any militia. If your interpretation was true, the right to own a firearm would not be so prevalent - simple. But that is not the case is it? Laws can be changed - it just requires the majority to do so - which has not been the case for the US. So let's not go down the path of conspiracy theories or rednecks and stick to the facts. |
|
#124
| |||
| |||
| Quote:
As for the guns depsite that it is written in the 2nd amendment (dated from more than 2 centuries ago...talk about a modern country) what we wonder as european/asian and all is why not even ONE second you doubt about the validity of that so called right.... |
|
#125
| |||
| |||
| Quote:
Were there a referendum that was done recently that can back up your statement? |
|
#126
| |||
| |||
| Quote:
If we needed a referendum on the issue, the majority would dictate that need... again comes back to the masses. |
|
#127
| ||||
| ||||
| and i'm paraphrasing here...ahem "beware the tyranny of an organized minority" cough cough...nra...cough |
|
#128
| ||||
| ||||
| So far not one person has provided an academically valid premise to justify this archaic ‘right.’ Every answer has been predicated solely on the answer, “just cuz. But it says so in the Bill of Rights!” Right, a document written over 200 years ago by guys wearing powdered wigs and lacey panties at a time when people had one shot muskets that took 5 minutes to reload. The meaning behind the 2nd amendment was to provide a means to empower the people to stand up for themselves to protect against abuses of power by the government and to fend of any future invasions from those dandy British fellows. In case you’ve forgotten your history, they are the ones that actually founded your original 13 colonies and brought us other nice things like…Hong Kong!, Benny Hill, the Spice girls and soccer hooligans. How it got bastardized from a “well-organized militia protecting the state” to Jethro and Bubba in their basement with automatic weapons I’ll never understand. As much as it pains me to admit it, but PDLM has a point, where do you draw the line? The amendment only states “arms” and tanks and jets are arms, so who made the decision automatic assault rifles are ok, but you can’t have an armoured tank? So where are the right-wing nutters screaming about this injustice and violation of their rights? As for the Supreme Court, well lets not go there, cuz obviously these are a bunch of people beyond reproach that never make mistakes and are completely apolitical and unbiased...(ok even writing that made me gag). A historical lesson in American hypocrisy is a whole other topic in its own right and is going off on a tangent. And the masses, please! Most people in any country are too apathetic to even get off their fat butts to go vote, they are unlikely to be bothered with the effort in changing the 2nd amendment, let alone fighting a powerful and rich lobby like the NRA. Last edited by sylvesterjay; 25-04-2007 at 11:01 PM. |
|
#129
| |||
| |||
| So who's sounding like a ranting loony now.... The line is drawn through "restrictions" and "gun control" which do exist in the US and the average American is very rational (fully automatic military rifles, bazookas, etc are banned). As for the majority - well, you can't blame the people if they are apathetic, if the issue was really a concern to them, they would get off their ass to vote. At the end of the day, its very simple: If you don't agree with the laws in the US, don't come, stay in the "Great North". |
|
#130
| ||||
| ||||
| I always ascribe to the simple notion of "you reap what you sow". If the culture you promote is one of war, fear, the right to bear arms, etc., this is essentially the fruit. I was neither surprised nor shocked. It was bound to happen, and will happen again, and again, and again. On a more interesting perspective, I wonder how an Iraqi lives each day, when they have several Virginia Tech shootings a day. Must be a real **** life. |
![]() |
Similar Threads | ||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| Looking for people (photo shooting) | Meet and Greet | |||
| Tools | |
| Rate This Thread | |
| |