TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Chill Out Room
-- Who owns guns?
Pages (6): « 1 2 3 4 5 [6]

quote:

Originally posted by arnoldj If you study and understand bettre our great constitution that has inspired other constitution around the world, the whole point of the constitution is to grant more rights to its citizens and not take out their rights. Again the purpose of the constitution is to GRANT more rights to its citizens and NOT take away

I have studied and understand your great constitution, I agree it is a great document and stands as a pillar of individual rights. You have made a critical error though, giving rights to citizens was not the goal of the constitution's writers so much as a means to an end. The founders of the US had an extreme distrust of government, especially strong centralized government (one can view this as justified or not depending on how one views the colonial system in place prior to the war of independence). The US constitution was set up in such a manner as to prevent the government from becoming powerful or at least so much so that it could dominate the interests of individuals or business. This is why there are so many checks and balances, additionally, individual freedoms were enshrined to prevent government from interfearing in peoples lives. The key difference though is that the rights and freedoms were not done for quality of life, they were done as a restraint on the government. That said, regardless of the reasoning it has worked out well for the citizens.

I do take issue with your stance on the second ammendment. The amendment specifies the right to bear armes is for the purposes of maintaining a militia. �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.� Over time the private militias evolved into the National Guard. The entire purpose of the National Guard is to act as a defence against the military.... this is why the Guard is controled by state governments rather then the central government. Since a well regulated militia exists in the form of the National Guard the need for citizens to own and carry fire arms is negated. Additionally I ask, how does a multitude of unconnected, unorganized, and unregulated individuals with small arms constitute a "well regulated militia" and do you really think that in the event the central government were to turn it's military against the citizenry small arms are actually going to act as adequate defence?

quote:

Originally posted by arnoldj WOW out of date... I guess that freedom of speech, the press, and religion is out of date. All of our fundamentals rights, that our creator has given us and stated there our out of date. Yeah thats it! If you study and understand bettre our great constitution that has inspired other constitution around the world, and ironic that El Che even read it and shed tears, the whole point of the constitution is to grant more rights to its citizens and not take out their rights. Again the purpose of the constitution is to GRANT more rights to its citizens and NOT take away

most of the other constitutional rights still have relevance in modern society; their prime intention is unchaged in modern society.

I didn't say anything about the rest o0f the constitution, only about the out of date bit.

what about my rights? - what about the american citizens right not be in the same space as someone who carries a gun?

what about the right of the shopkeeper to not have a "legal" gun pointed at them?

the rights of the school children killed by a gun weilding maniac who found it pretty simple to get hold of weapons.

thats the problem with guns - they give power to those who are pointing them, and take away rights and power from those that they are pointed at.

I hope to buy my own M16A2 when i get out of the corps. Love that thing! I'm a good shot too. Took 50 shots, 46 in the black from 200, 300 and 500 yards in various positions (prone, kneeling, sitting, standing)with iron sights! Take that army. (Optic sights only at 200, 300yd)

Re: Re: Re: Re: Who owns guns?

quote:

Originally posted by Cloud awesome

Anyone played resident evil 2 where you can get the extended desert eagle?

Fucking sick!

quote:

Originally posted by Lunar Phase 7 Anyone played resident evil 2 where you can get the extended desert eagle? Fucking sick!

The 10 inch barrel extension. That shit is real, too!

(The one on the right.)

Weapons don't kill. It's the people that use them.

quote:

Originally posted by Salegon Weapons don't kill. It's the people that use them.

Kratos is a god

quote:

Originally posted by stren Kratos is a god of war

Fixed.

That game is fuckin' sick.

quote:

Originally posted by Ygrene Fixed.

Oooo didn't know you had PS2

quote:

Originally posted by Moral Hazard I have studied and understand your great constitution, I agree it is a great document and stands as a pillar of individual rights. You have made a critical error though, giving rights to citizens was not the goal of the constitution's writers so much as a means to an end. The founders of the US had an extreme distrust of government, especially strong centralized government (one can view this as justified or not depending on how one views the colonial system in place prior to the war of independence). The US constitution was set up in such a manner as to prevent the government from becoming powerful or at least so much so that it could dominate the interests of individuals or business. This is why there are so many checks and balances, additionally, individual freedoms were enshrined to prevent government from interfearing in peoples lives. The key difference though is that the rights and freedoms were not done for quality of life, they were done as a restraint on the government. That said, regardless of the reasoning it has worked out well for the citizens. I do take issue with your stance on the second ammendment. The amendment specifies the right to bear armes is for the purposes of maintaining a militia. �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.� Over time the private militias evolved into the National Guard. The entire purpose of the National Guard is to act as a defence against the military.... this is why the Guard is controled by state governments rather then the central government. Since a well regulated militia exists in the form of the National Guard the need for citizens to own and carry fire arms is negated. Additionally I ask, how does a multitude of unconnected, unorganized, and unregulated individuals with small arms constitute a "well regulated militia" and do you really think that in the event the central government were to turn it's military against the citizenry small arms are actually going to act as adequate defence?

HES GONNA GO TOE TO TOES WITH SADDAM AND SHIT THOUGH NUKKA!

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.