Guns: how much longer will it take ....

@Baldimo,

Fine. Ban all semi autos. Back to the guns in existence when they wrote the second amendment. Youcan have all the single shot muzzle loader flintlocks you can carry. Even ones with pistol grips. That should make oralloy very happy.

3 Replies

@snood,

Quote:

See, now - you knowno one here is asking to ban handguns. That’s disingenuous poppycock.

That just isn't true Snood, there are a couple of people on here who have straight out said we should eliminate the 2nd Amendment. MJ is one of those people, just because you don't, doesn't mean that there isn't people who do.

Quote:

All I want is to somehow limit the number of rounds a person intent on killing people could fire off.

Well, you have 2 choices, limit magizene capacity or make semi-auto guns illegal, some states have tried ammo limits, a CA judge recently ruled such limits as unconstitutional:
https://www.kqed.org/news/11736729/judge-rules-californias-voter-approved-high-capacity-ammunition-ban-unconstitutional

As for the making semi-auto guns illegal, that is a vast majority of guns in America, even a revolver counts as a semi-auto.

Quote:

That would mean things like banning bump stocks and large volume magazines.

Bump stocks have been banned, by Trump. Large volume magazines is vague. For most semi-auto rifles, 30 round mags are standard size mags not large capacity. I happen to think anything more than 30 would be large capacity but do we really need laws on such things?

They are claiming the VA Beach shooter had handguns, a 1911 to be specific, those are single stack mags, 9 shots if I do recall. They say he had "large capacity" mags, but I haven't read what they consider large capacity, as of this morning still no mention of capacity other than it was large.

0 Replies

@MontereyJack,

Quote:

Fine. Ban all semi autos. Back to the guns in existence when they wrote the second amendment. Youcan have all the single shot muzzle loader flintlocks you can carry. Even ones with pistol grips. That should make oralloy very happy.

This is perfect, did you know there were already multishot guns being made when the 2nd Amendment was written? It's one of the reasons they didn't say muskets and instead used the term arms. They just got done fighting a war of independence, do you really think they didn't know about multishot guns? The only reason the single shot musket was the most common gun was because of it's price, it was cheaper than the other guns that were pitched to the founding fathers. History isn't your strong suit is it. I've said it before and I'll say it again, you should read the Federalist and anti-Federalist papers, you would have a much better understanding of our Constitution.

0 Replies

@MontereyJack,

MontereyJack wrote:

Fine. Ban all semi autos. Back to the guns in existence when they wrote the second amendment. Youcan have all the single shot muzzle loader flintlocks you can carry. Even ones with pistol grips. That should make oralloy very happy.

Can I pick an amendment to the Constitution to get rid of as well?

3 Replies

@McGentrix,

Do you have any others that facilitate mass murder?

2 Replies

@McGentrix,

Actuallly it was scalia who muaed that that was what the second amendment covered.

1 Reply

@McGentrix,

I assume that would be the 1st amendment.

0 Replies

@MontereyJack,

MontereyJack wrote:

Do you have any others that facilitate mass murder?

More people have been killed because of religion than any other reason, but no, not 1.

11 and 19 could probably be done away with though. Would make the country a better place.

0 Replies

Spare us the leftist phony outrage.

0 Replies

@MontereyJack,

MontereyJack wrote:

It's truly remarkable how you never tire or repeating the same lies over and over and over ad nauseam

You have a big mouth, but you're all talk. You cannot point out a single untrue statement in any of my posts.

0 Replies

@MontereyJack,

MontereyJack wrote:

Everything farmer posted was eminently true.

Nope. Farmerman was wrong to say that I was avoiding something.

Farmerman was wrong to say that I was omitting something.

Farmerman was wrong to say that there are inconvenient points to my arguments.

Farmerman's suggestion that civil liberties are extremist and dangerous to society is an opinion, and as such is neither right nor wrong. It shows that Farmerman believes in fascism however.

Your endorsement of the opinion that civil liberties are extremist and dangerous to society shows that you as well believe in fascism.

Farmerman was wrong to say that the Second Amendment is silent on some issues.

Farmerman was wrong to say that any part of the Bill of Rights limits any other right.

Farmerman was wrong to say that the NRA wishes to deny anyone's right to life.

0 Replies

@farmerman,

farmerman wrote:

Youve made my case, which is the recognition that you care not for anyone but yourself.

You have not made any such case. You are just lying about me out of frustration because you wanted to violate people's civil liberties for fun, and I'm not letting you hurt anyone.

farmerman wrote:

1. The Superlativ"ization" of the 2nd amendment" to the total disregard of the others

Nope. I'm not disregarding any rights anywhere.

farmerman wrote:

Your Constitution seems to be made of just one "CIVIL RIGHT" defined.

No it doesn't.

farmerman wrote:

Youre wacky oral. Seek help before you go postal on us.

Leftists get really childish when they are prevented from violating people's civil liberties for fun.

0 Replies

@MontereyJack,

MontereyJack wrote:

Onnce again farmer is spot on.

Nope. Farmerman was wrong when he said I don't care for anyone other than myself.

Farmerman was wrong to say I was disregarding any rights.

Farmerman was wrong to say that my Constitution seems to consist of one right.

Farmerman was wrong to throw a childish temper tantrum because he isn't allowed to violate people's civil liberties for fun.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

AAs usual, none of your statements are true. The only thing you do care about is the second amendment. You've said you don't care about trumps lies and general lawlessness as long as he supports your view of the seond amendment. It was your civil liberties that got the shooter the ability to legally buy the two handguns he killed twelve people with. That is unacceptable.

1 Reply

@MontereyJack,

MontereyJack wrote:

AAs usual, none of your statements are true.

You have a big mouth, but you are all talk. You cannot point out a single untrue statement in any of my posts.

MontereyJack wrote:

The only thing you do care about is the second amendment.

No it isn't.

MontereyJack wrote:

You've said you don't care about trumps lies and general lawlessness as long as he supports your view of the seond amendment.

His lies are harmless, and are paltry compared to Obama's lies.

There is no reason to think that Mr. Trump has violated any laws. But even if he did, it wasn't any worse than what Bill Clinton did.

MontereyJack wrote:

It was your civil liberties that got the shooter the ability to legally buy the two handguns he killed twelve people with. That is unacceptable.

Wrong again. My civil liberties had nothing to do with it.

0 Replies

@MontereyJack,

MontereyJack wrote:

Fine. Ban all semi autos. Back to the guns in existence when they wrote the second amendment. You can have all the single shot muzzle loader flintlocks you can carry. Even ones with pistol grips. That should make oralloy very happy.

Leftists sure do hate civil liberties.

This is why people need to vote for Trump so he can continue to protect us from these leftists.

0 Replies

@MontereyJack,

MontereyJack wrote:

Do you have any others that facilitate mass murder?

The Second Amendment does not facilitate any sort of murders in any way.

0 Replies

@MontereyJack,

MontereyJack wrote:

The virginia beach shooter legally bought two handguns. Twelve more innocent people murdered by oralloy's civil liberties.

Wrong again. My civil liberties had nothing to do with it.

0 Replies

@snood,

snood wrote:

See, now - you know no one here is asking to ban handguns. That’s disingenuous poppycock.

Only a leftist could be bold enough to say that no one is asking to ban handguns just a few posts after another leftist posted a rant about how horrible it is that someone could buy handguns.

snood wrote:

All I want is to somehow limit the number of rounds a person intent on killing people could fire off. That would mean things like banning bump stocks and large volume magazines.

Are you capable of comprehending that you are not the only leftist in the universe, and there might be other leftists out there who insist on banning other things?

0 Replies

@MontereyJack,

MontereyJack wrote:

Actuallly it was scalia who muaed that that was what the second amendment covered.

Scalia altered it in your favor.

The Second Amendment says that people have the right to have standard infantry weapons. Scalia limited the Heller ruling to weapons that are suitable for civilian self defense.

If you'd like people to be free to carry full-auto rifles, grenades and grenade launchers, and anti-tank bazookas, I'm game.

I wouldn't mind having a closet full of 84mm bazookas. That's real stopping power. Mr. Green

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/AT4

1 Reply

Guns: how much longer will it take ....

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know