@Fedya posted:By that logic the government can shut down any broadcaster or internet site it doesn't like because at the time of the 1A, nobody could ever imagine radio, TV, or blogs and discussion groups like x4.
Funny how this sort of muddle-headed thinking is only ever used to try to emasculate the 2A.
Yes, because people can't or shouldn't make distinctions on what is or isn't healthy for a society. Social and societal absolutisms are what's incredibly "muddled".
See: Amend
@"We"-Ka-Bong posted:Why is it so often an all or nothing? I don't want to remove guns from law abiding citizens, but I do want guns regulated at least as much as cars and some cars are not street legal.
Very few are arguing to take all the guns away, so why can't we talk about how some guns just don't belong in private citizens hands or at the least, should not be easily accessible.
It's a strawman talking point pushed by the gun lobby. You say "hey listen, seems like these AR-15s are a common link in the vast majority of mass shootings, maybe we should try to regulate who can buy them so that people who are mentally unstable can't get access to these weapons"? And the response is "SEE THEY'RE GOING TO RAID YOUR HOUSE AND TAKE ALL YOUR GUNS AND THEN YOUR CHOPSTICKS AND THEN MASS VIOLENCE WILL ENSUE AND YOUR FAMILY IS GOING TO BE MURDERED AND HOW ARE WE GOING TO EAT OUR SUSHI!!!!". Of course, no one on this forum would ever use a strawman argument. We're all too smart for that 
.
Guns were invented for:
1) Limp dick syndrome
2) So I don't have to eat sushi with a spork
3) ????
Anyone? Someone with a great depth of knowledge on all things guns and 2nd Amendment that can never be changed please tell me why guns were invented?
@Music City posted:Oh, I dunno... maybe because drinking a few beers is a little different that defending yourself from a violent criminal?
âHold on Mr. Rapist/Murderer... I need to re-load my Government-mandated 4 round max clip to defend myself.â
Good fucking grief...
How many bullets does it take to get to the center of Mr. Rapist/Murderer?
@Music City posted:Oh, I dunno... maybe because drinking a few beers is a little different that defending yourself from a violent criminal?
âHold on Mr. Rapist/Murderer... I need to re-load my Government-mandated 4 round max clip to defend myself.â
Good fucking grief...
NO, not good fucking grief. We currently have a FEDERAL LAW limiting guns to 3 bullets while goose and duck hunting. We currently have FEDERALLY MANDATED state laws limiting .08 BAC when driving. What is wrong with a FEDERAL LAW that limits gun magazines to 6 bullets? Why do you make any type of gun control an either or propisition? We all need to work together to come up with a solution to mass shootings. I think even you can agree that a lmit on magazine size is better than no guns at all. I currently have a SKS that holds 10 bullets. I would gladly give it up if it means I get to keep my other guns rather that having them taken away too. Besides if you need more than 4 shots to defend yourself from a rapist or murderer you are a piss poor shot and shouldn't own a gun anyway.
@Music City posted:
One kills.
One is the bedrock of free societies.
Which is which?
I bet all you rational people out there think a person could only answer one way.
@Henry posted:Guns were invented for:
one? Someone with a great depth of knowledge on all things guns and 2nd Amendment that can never be changed please tell me why guns were invented?
Best I could find HENRY:
Around the late 14th century in Italy, smaller and portable hand-cannons or schioppi were developed, creating in effect the first smoothbore personal firearm. The earliest surviving firearm in Europe was found in OtepÃĪÃĪ, Estonia and it dates to at least as early as 1396.[38]
Firearms underwent a fast development during the 1419-1434 Hussite Wars. The Hussite army consisted mostly of civilian militia, both men and women, who lacked the skill, experience and often weapons and armor comparable to that of the professional Crusader invaders that they faced. Gradually, Hussites pioneered battlefield use of firearms together with war wagons. Firearms were employed in auxiliary roles in 1419-1421. The first use of firearms as primary offensive weapons took place in the 1421 Battle of KutnÃĄ Hora. From this moment on, firearms were at the core of Hussite war strategy and tactics as well as a staple of Czech civilian possession. The Hussite militia used a number of handheld fireams, including pÃÅĄÅĨala [cs], which later found its way through German and French into English as the term pistol,[39] hÃĄkovnice [cs], an infantry weapon heavier than pÃÅĄÅĨala, and yet heavier tarasnic (fauconneau). As regards artillery, Hussites used the Czech: houfnice, which gave rise to the English term, "howitzer" (houf meaning crowd for its intended use of shooting stone and iron shot against massed enemy forces),[40][41][42] bombarda (mortar) and dÄlo (cannon).[43]
In the late 15th century, the Ottoman Empire used firearms as part of its regular infantry.
The CDL license is a great example of sensible controls and regulations. If you want to drive a big rig, you not only have to demonstrate the skills to operate said vehicle, but you are also required to submit to random testing and periodic physical examinations.
Why should it be easier to acquire an assault rifle than get a haircut or change a flat tire? I mean, the logic is ridiculous.
I get it thereâs a ton of money to be made in selling guns and ammo and accessories and the like. The manufacturers give a lot of money to politicians (both parties) to drive their agenda. But when like 85% of the public - including large percentage of gun owners - are in favor of things like gun registries and universal background checks why do we continue to put up with the 15% that likes to drone on about âtheirâ rights? Too bad so sad.
The funny thing about this whole discussion is those yapping most loudly about 2A likely fall into one of two categories - 1) they are probably unfit to own one and 2) they make a lot of money in that business.
One other point - 1A doesnât protect you in a non government setting. I canât just run my mouth and say whatever the hell I want at work and expect to keep my job. People need to quit pushing and promoting that narrative. Feel free to express yourself, but do so at your own risk.
Blame the Dagos.
Fuck you ammo. ð
@ammo posted:Best I could find HENRY:
Around the late 14th century in Italy, smaller and portable hand-cannons or schioppi were developed, creating in effect the first smoothbore personal firearm. The earliest surviving firearm in Europe was found in OtepÃĪÃĪ, Estonia and it dates to at least as early as 1396.[38]
Firearms underwent a fast development during the 1419-1434 Hussite Wars. The Hussite army consisted mostly of civilian militia, both men and women, who lacked the skill, experience and often weapons and armor comparable to that of the professional Crusader invaders that they faced. Gradually, Hussites pioneered battlefield use of firearms together with war wagons. Firearms were employed in auxiliary roles in 1419-1421. The first use of firearms as primary offensive weapons took place in the 1421 Battle of KutnÃĄ Hora. From this moment on, firearms were at the core of Hussite war strategy and tactics as well as a staple of Czech civilian possession. The Hussite militia used a number of handheld fireams, including pÃÅĄÅĨala [cs], which later found its way through German and French into English as the term pistol,[39] hÃĄkovnice [cs], an infantry weapon heavier than pÃÅĄÅĨala, and yet heavier tarasnic (fauconneau). As regards artillery, Hussites used the Czech: houfnice, which gave rise to the English term, "howitzer" (houf meaning crowd for its intended use of shooting stone and iron shot against massed enemy forces),[40][41][42] bombarda (mortar) and dÄlo (cannon).[43]
In the late 15th century, the Ottoman Empire used firearms as part of its regular infantry.
You're kind of killing the joke here GoldieAmmoya
