2nd amendment supporters

Yeah lol I don't know why other kids parents wouldn't let their kids play at my papaw's because he had gun, but they'd send them to schools with armed guards...technically wouldn't they be just as safe at my house?

 

Firstly, I agree with what has been said. Doctors will skew your words, their job is to diagnose and prescribe medicine. So in other words, anyone who may happen to have depression or Bipolar, they don't have the same Rights as you and I in your world, because they have a Chemical imbalance?

There are people who seem totally normal, who up and commit murders out of the blue. There's no way to stop that, bad things happen in life. But being less restrictive means more citizens have guns for protection. There are more guns than citizens in this country, still more people die from falling than gun deaths.

Furthermore, how am I inaccurate about Liberals? If you don't just want to "tax more," and build more government; what do you want? Freedom?

Again there's a collision, because freedom can't be compromised. If you truly believed in freedom, you'd believe in it even if someone is depressed/Bipolar. Your whole ideals are hypocritical cause you say you believe in freedom, yet Liberals believe in more government control which is counterproductive!

 

Exactly, and there is also mass misdiagnosis. So because one doctor thought something that person should lose their rights? Also bipolar doesn't mean anything really, doesn't mean your necessarily angry. I don't have it but have family members that do. It is only disqualifying if you are considered a danger to yourself or others, lots of people are undiagnosed. At one point they had me misdiagnosed with it.

 

First off I know/knew people who have/had bi-polar, so I'm aware of that gray area you speak of. There are different levels of severity to someone who is bi-polar and it's within that level of severity do I think it becomes appropriate to warrant an action.

(Also point of argument: we all agree that guns don't belong in the hands of crazy people)

Also just because more people die from cause X doesn't mean cause Y which also kills or harms people but to a lesser amount also isn't an issue to address. It just means that perhaps X needs to be addressed as a separate issue by finding out how to prevent people from falling with safety recommendations or more guard rails or more grips on bathtub designs. (your cause X was death caused by falling)

I explained how you people who identify as liberal, because there is a middle-populace who have a mix of some conservative fiscal/social values and some liberal ones. Yet you are just saying Liberals want ___, and it's a definitive statement. It's a stereotype of the reality of people who identify as liberal and it's insulting and inaccurate.

In my case their are times I want lower taxes, and other times I want higher taxes, but it depends on how the tax is levied, what it's for, if I've seen public benefits for what I've supported or not. Is the tax local, state or federal? Those details matter to me.

You can't consider me pure libertarian because I obviously believe that government plays a bigger and important role than what you agree it does. And I can't be considered Republican either.

 

And it should only be disqualifying once it's gotten to the point where that person is a danger to themselves and others. THAT's the SPECIFIC factor I'd be looking in any kinda of system/law that addresses this issue.

If that specific is NOT there, then I'd be against that attempt/method of addressing this issue because of course it will fail.

In addition, guns that only respond to the owner holding them is something the gun industry can do.

^Now remember what I've said in this post because I feel that I'm repeating myself at this point from a post I already made on a previous page in this thread.

 

Okay, but if you did that how would you suppose that guns be rented at shooting ranges? How would I be able to shoot my cousins guns at the range when we go , because currently I can not afford a firearm, but am saving up for my first shotgun, or .22

 

I just want to be left alone....... With my constitution rights.

There should be a FLAT tax, No matter if you make a million or 20k, Sorry you did not go back to school or invent something and made money doing so. They should not have to pick up the slack for ANYONE.

Get rid of the 'one guy' and go back to states taking care of themselves and rightfully voted in people. I don't need any asshat telling me where and how I should save.

NO MORE PARTIES!!! = NO MORE DRAMA/BULLSHIT!

If everyone fell under the same 'stamp' per say, No R or D, Just a A, American.

That would weed out all the lowlifes and criminal element, The criminals could be cornered by their own neighbors with guns instead of living in fear from the animals and the shoes on the other foot.
If you want that lifestyle, There will be a place for that, Pull it here and out you go.

I know for sure all of you would agree that 'we' could make common sense calls better than our so called leaders and LEO's. The more they choke us with lies, Blames, Deaths, The list etc id say if we all banded together as the 'common fucked over american' people, We out number them by the dozens.

Do you sit and think of harmful things to do to others?

If you do, You are out numbered and a mob of people who truly seek peace will end you, To get there. Why should we tolerate these people? The ones who lie and deny but its a fact they fucked up, Or they are a group of thugs, Cant strong arm the block if they are not laying over anymore.

Case in point, If level heads of the masses said ENOUGH is enough and started calling the shots, The country and world would spin a lot smoother.

 

Well, we all may have a different definition of crazies; who could decide that? The truth is, to Constitution doesn't leave any room for that "The Right of the people to keep and bear Arms Shall not be infringed." If someone is known for violent crimes, that is the only instance. But to me it's absurd that many people defend background checks/denying guns to non violent drugs users. In a way, they don't understand they are supporting nothing more than a cultural war against the Hippies, and again the Government entwined something good for the people, with something bad.

This is what i was hoping you'd say, I'm from NY. Okay, so you actually support paying Government to "install safety rails" in all these different buildings accross the US? Who has to pay for that? You, me and, every taxpayer in America. But isn't that more of an incidental thing? I mean, I'm sure some people fall when drunk, possibly pushed over but, what about the people who die from Skydiving? Therefore, Government cannot protect us from everything. The most ironic thing to me about this argument is that Government Sympathizers believe one group of bullies with extensive arms, is better than individuals being free to carry their own arms. In other words, there are many instances where cops/soldiers go crazy and kill people, so why do they have more Rights (in your opinion) than me, as a free and independent human being?

I have said multiple times, What is it then, that I am missing about Liberalism? I've also stated that I personally am Liberal on Social issues (and economically conservative.) But, Liberalism calls for more federal government, and I support little to No Government on a federal scale. I believe they typically do a bad job and lose money on things the free market could do faster and better. Liberals can't refute those ideals because they fly over their head; they just want to blame corperations for EVERYTHiNG and act as those the government took no part in taking/legalizing bribes. I've talked to Liberals who told me it'll all be better if we just tax more. It's okay we're on an unsustainable path, we'll just tax a little more. There's nothing logical about that. Liberals look at Government as "free" stuff, IE "free" pre k, "free" food but, we in the real world know; nothing is free. So who pays for this? Us! The people! Where would the power be if not in the hands of government? The people. We don't have to tax people a shitload more. If we stopped policing the world, running this stupid war on drugs and, cut the federal government down.

Well, I just believe most people don't want to hurt each other. Greed causes that though. However, if you look at how our country is ran, the greediest are on top, controlling our politicians to have support for wars, violent intervention and, non violent criminals. Do you believe it should be up to the government what I put in my body? Marijuana is totally safe, but politicians keep it illegal, even while kids are having heart attacks smoking fake (synthetic) Marijuana and no one blinks an eye at the hypocrisy.

You can't believe in freedom for some and not others and that's the hypocrisy. Liberals want to ban certain guns and large soft drinks, Republicans want to ban drugs and birth control. Libertarians want both parties to leave individuals alone and let them be free. Society has accepted the Status Quo's ideology of Government. (Constant warfare/welfare spending) but i think many Americans still falsely believe themselves to be "free and independent;" only in your mind. The American Rule of law is dead, except in the hearts of true patriots who want to save this country before we spread to thin, devalue our currency too much and, collapse as is the pattern of all Great Nations throughtout History. The two party system has been taking our freedoms too much since 9/11, I am one of many who feels MUCH less safe with Big Brother watching over us; American citizens are 8x more likely to get killed by a cop than a terrorist. I'm not trying to insult people who don't believe as I do, but I have seen corruption first hand. Police in America falsify confessions, shoot innocent unarmed individuals and terrorize random people walking by stopping/searching them for no reason. That's why I say, our government see's us as statistics and doesn't care who their system abuses in the process.

 

Americans are the only people I know of in the civilised world that equate gun ownership with freedom. You seem to argue that your freedom is based upon your ability to defend yourselves against neighbours,criminals and/or a tryranical Government. The pro-gun lobby describes the individual as one in constant preparedness for violent reaction.

I have at least as many rights as you do plus I live in a society that defends me & everyone else with law & an effective Police Force (armed if necessary). In the UK,for decades now,every attempt has been made to remove illegal firearms from the community. A few,admittedly, remain out there but were I to claim on that basis,that I need to arm myself,or to defend myself from my Government, (or supposed invaders) I'd be considered crazy!

My freedom includes a freedom from the degree of fear that Americans accept. American posters have said before that if all your laws were persued & properly enforced by your authorities,if your Police had 911 response times that matched those we expect in the UK ,for example, violent crime would markedly decrease. Seems to me that while you are defending percieved attacks on your freedom to bear arms,the people so very well paid for protecting you,are getting an easy ride.

Trying to trivialise gun related injury & death figures by comparing them to knife crime & accidents isnt an argument,its attempted distraction. Yeah,all those figures are real-so do something about them or not-but you must accept that in the civilised West the US has a real & genuine gun problem that all too regularly shocks the rest of the world.

Fitness to own firearms is a serious issue & I take the points you make about how they may threaten individual freedom. Rather than throwing out attempts to ensure lethal weapons are not available to those who might use them irrationally,there should be a sincere debate,between all concerned as to what a valid assessment would look like. Where would the line be drawn between acceptence & refusal to allow a licence,on what grounds,rights of appeal ect ?

Yes there are folk who without warning go out & kill. Thats reality & can't be legislated against but you can minimise ,considerably lessen, the odds of that happening & that has to be in everyones interest. A responsible NRA might have agreed to work with Government & State,accepting,after all the tragedies you've suffered, the need for some measure of control, negotiated a trial project in in limited locations for a test period of time.

Lessons would be learned on all sides & a formula could be submitted to the people in selected States for a further trial period,allowing for the views of all in each community before finally going back to national legislators & for Party discussion.

Again,I see government as something to be worked with,not an assumed enemy.

 

But you deny totally government crime. Our government kills people everyday. There's no need for me to even talk to you, you don't understand American Principles. The Right to protect myself, IS based on freedom. That's how my country is founded, you seem to think cops/soldiers are less likely to go crazy than regular citizens, and I would argue that they're no different than regular citizens and commonly have lapse in judgement, and hurt/kill innocent people. You advocate more violence than you claim to oppose. I never said government was the enemy, I said they spy on us, kill us and, undermine our freedom. Not only guns, but all freedom. These are the reasons (coupled with attempted disarmament) that made us break free from our oppressive government. Yet, all you in the UK want us to do, is give into ignorant knee-jerk fear and criminalize a HUGE groups of people, due to the actions of a very very small amount of gun dearths. I am not distracting from the "problem" cause their is no problem. I have a gun, it's not like I shot anything except targets. The police response time here in the US can be upward of hours or more. What do you suggest we do during that time? Duck and cover? Get out of here! Mexican drug cartels get AK47's from our government, and you're gonna tell me, that I can't own a pistols cause it's "dangerous?" I'm worried about you in the UK, total government compliance leads to genocide. (many times throughout history.) Freedom is mroe than the Right to Bear Arms, it is the Constitution, and the Rights therein, and NO governmental overreach on regulating what an individual chooses to do with their body.

 

Wow! Okay,if all what you say is true then wheres your campaign of opposition to all these Government crimes? You certainly imply that your Government is the enemy! Hows your Constitution providing you with any kind of freedom at all given the desciption you've just posted?

Don't worry about us guys in the UK in danger of genocide seems like you're a helluva lot closer to it than we compliers are. We don't 'comply' we participate,we work with,our Government consults-we expect it to!

Call your Government to account;organise!

 

Well there's a couple places where the government has disregarded freedom since the war on terror/war on drugs and that that is

4th Amendment (searches and seizures, I know the UK has a simular Right)

There are several Amendments having to do with due process, I believe 6,7 & 8 which the government has violated. We don't have freedom of assembly (1st Amendment Rights) around secret service, (due to HR347) and congress only have a 9% approval rating (below poligamy.) I think the problem we're having is too much government involvement, and not enough lienancy for those who are just culturally different than them.

I just think there's a little more we can do as civilized and advanced beings to work with other individuals, without cracking their skulls in, you know? Drug Addiction is a serious decease and yet, these people are treated as criminals. There is so much in my government that is not right that it is very hard to see the good.

 

There are serious fundamental differences between the UK and the US that people on the UK side of the pond just can't seem to understand. Which I can understand why they wouldn't.. I've never been there or lived there but I have met many people from there that migrated here long term and I have done plenty of reading.

It begins with geographical, both land mass and propensity for natural disasters. England is organized more in cities, then towns or villages or whatever, then countryside. They are also not subjected to the myriad natural disasters we are. From hurricanes, tornadoes, blizzards, heat waves, mudslides, earthquakes.. in instances like that there is one person to rely on. And it ain't the authorities. Additionally, we have more grey areas, no man's land so to speak.

This is a rugged country and has been since before it's formation. The colonists had two choices: die or be self reliant. That is still true in many aspects of our postmodern society, and regardless, the ideals are engrained.

I refuse to even get myself worked up over Brits anymore. You don't like guns or the idea that guns preserve freedom over here.. or the idea that Americans own guns en masse? Well, all I can say is it's good you live where you do. If it's working for you there, good. But don't try to impose your ideology on us, especially when you don't understand us.

Not that it matters anyway. We will never give up our guns. And if it comes to an attempted seizure, well, all I can say is it won't be successful.

 

Maybe the brits want us disarmed so bad because they want to take their land back.

 

If the people have rights, they should not give those rights back to the government. That is a bad direction to move towards.

The second amendment is as much a part of the constitution as the 1st, 5th or 14th.

 

here here my good man

 

er...Not even if you threw in Fort Knox mate !

 

The Doctor hates guns, and that is good enough for me.

 

Nah, the Brittish have a history of being violently imperialistic. If anything, they want us weak and powerless so they stay on top.

 

Thats right Yank,and when we take power you will all drink Tea and like it !