Yesterday, I was never prouder of my President, nor more ashamed of my Government

[Jamie_B]

Have you not heard that some mental health professionals think being a christian is a mental illness. so who makes the descion that you are a whack job..having a gun in your basement with tons of canned food could label you as an extremist

 

There is no medical diagnosis of mental health issues called "Christian" don't be ridiculous

[Jamie_B]

Constitution: "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."

 

Seems to me the Constitution-bending Liberals always forget those parts.

 

Really because well regulated doesn't mean your rights are being infringed.

 

Try again

[Bengals1181]

Constitution: "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."

 

Seems to me the Constitution-bending Liberals always forget those parts.

 

 

I'm still wanting to know how doing a background check is infringing on your second amendment rights.

[|Bunghole|]

 

There is no medical diagnosis of mental health issues called "Christian" don't be ridiculous

Maybe not but it could be persuasively argued, as it could for believers in ANY religion, given the history of particularly the Abrahamic religions. Not a great track record there. 

[|Bunghole|]

 

 

I'm still wanting to know how doing a background check is infringing on your second amendment rights.

IMO, it is not. I want those too. I went through one when I bought my .45. Unfortunately I don't think they are very effective, and are more nuisance than barrier.

[Jamie_B]

Maybe not but it could be persuasively argued, as it could for believers in ANY religion, given the history of particularly the Abrahamic religions. Not a great track record there. 

 

Right but it doesn't fall under mental health problems

[T-Dub]

 

 

The Onion’s Tips For Passing Gun Control Legislation

 

 

• Write gun control legislation. Pass gun control legislation.

• Before voting on gun control bill, try, if you can, to remember any recent examples in which guns have been used to kill innocent people.

• Acknowledge that it’s going to be hard to buck the pressure of the high-powered gun lobby, but not that fucking hard, dumbass.

• Consider if overwhelming public support for a particular measure is something you want to be associated with or not.

• Inform your decision by researching whether guns are good or bad when placed in the wrong hands.

• Muster everything that’s left in your black, desiccated heart to do something that might actually be of service to someone other than yourself.

• Carefully assess the other side of the argument wherein mentally unstable people can buy weapons at a gun show with no problem whatsoever, and then realize there is no other side of this argument.

• Put on your stupid little suit, run a comb through your greasy hair, go to the U.S Capitol building, pick up your fancy little gold pen, and pass a fucking gun control bill.

 

[sois]

the  constitution is gay

[|OneHeartBeat|]

I think its naive of those who think that more laws are going to stop people who already don't give a shit about the law in the 1st place. I'm not against background checks; Its just not going to stop any criminal from getting a gun. Making it harder is not good enough by any means.

[Bengals1181]

I think its naive of those who think that more laws are going to stop people who already don't give a shit about the law in the 1st place. I'm not against background checks; Its just not going to stop any criminal from getting a gun. Making it harder is not good enough by any means.

 

 

most criminals?  no.  Some kids and mentally handicapped individuals?  Sure.  

 

 

If the law even keeps 1000 people from getting guns who shouldn't have guns, its done a heck of a job.

 

 

 

No single law is ever going to get rid of crime.  It's not going to happen.  Turns out, my wife's car was broken in to last night.  Things like that will never stop.  It doesn't mean laws can't be put in place to cut down on crime.

[Jamie_B]

 

 

I'm still wanting to know how doing a background check is infringing on your second amendment rights.

 

 

It doesnt he just wanted to come in and spike the football.

 

 

most criminals?  no.  Some kids and mentally handicapped individuals?  Sure.  

 

 

If the law even keeps 1000 people from getting guns who shouldn't have guns, its done a heck of a job.

 

 

 

No single law is ever going to get rid of crime.  It's not going to happen.  Turns out, my wife's car was broken in to last night.  Things like that will never stop.  It doesn't mean laws can't be put in place to cut down on crime.

 

 

Exactly.

 

And I'm sorry about your wife's car.

[Bengals1181]

 

Exactly.

 

And I'm sorry about your wife's car.

 

 

it could have been worse.  Must have just been some bored kid walking down the street.  They only took a couple bucks.  Didn't even take all the money that was in the car, left the CD's, and didn't even touch the DVD's or portable DVD player in the backseat. No forcible entry, she probably just forgot to lock the doors lastnight.

[Jamie_B]

 

 

it could have been worse.  Must have just been some bored kid walking down the street.  They only took a couple bucks.  Didn't even take all the money that was in the car, left the CD's, and didn't even touch the DVD's or portable DVD player in the backseat. No forcible entry, she probably just forgot to lock the doors lastnight.

 

 

My brother had it happen a few years ago right in front of our house, they broke the back window, while we were still awake, kids didnt take anything he just wanted to show how tough he was in front of his other friends, dumbasses came back up and my brother chased them down and made them stay put till the cops got there.

[Jamie_B]

As I understand the proposal it expands current background checks to guns shows and internet sales. Obviously your not going to stop every possible scenario, however it will reduce the chances of criminals or more likely those with mental illness issues from getting them. Recall that the VA Tech shooter had been ordered to seek outpatient mental health treatment by a court, had better laws been in place at the time there is a chance that it wouldnt have happened, and thats all we can ask for is a chance. It doesnt take away the rights of law abiding citizens to own firearms, all we ask for is better regulation of those firearms. I mean to even own a car you have to go through government approved training to operate it in most states and then pass a test and show a certain level of competency to be able to use it. I dont see why requiring similar for owners is akin to taking the guns away. It's not, and there has been not a single post in this thread showing it is.

[Jamie_B]

Whoop-di-doo

[MichaelWeston]

I think its naive of those who think that more laws are going to stop people who already don't give a shit about the law in the 1st place. I'm not against background checks; Its just not going to stop any criminal from getting a gun. Making it harder is not good enough by any means.

If someone wants to break into your house they can just smash a window. Locking your front doors and windows won't stop them. So why not just leave your front door and windows open?

[|OneHeartBeat|]

If someone wants to break into your house they can just smash a window. Locking your front doors and windows won't stop them. So why not just leave your front door and windows open?

If someone breaks into my house they will be shot if not killed by my dog first, and I usually do leave my doors unlocked.

[|OneHeartBeat|]

As I understand the proposal it expands current background checks to guns shows and internet sales. Obviously your not going to stop every possible scenario, however it will reduce the chances of criminals or more likely those with mental illness issues from getting them. Recall that the VA Tech shooter had been ordered to seek outpatient mental health treatment by a court, had better laws been in place at the time there is a chance that it wouldnt have happened, and thats all we can ask for is a chance. It doesnt take away the rights of law abiding citizens to own firearms, all we ask for is better regulation of those firearms. I mean to even own a car you have to go through government approved training to operate it in most states and then pass a test and show a certain level of competency to be able to use it. I dont see why requiring similar for owners is akin to taking the guns away. It's not, and there has been not a single post in this thread showing it is.

I would have no problem with that proposal at all. Will they still be able to get a gun if they really want one? Probably.

[Jamie_B]

I would have no problem with that proposal at all. Will they still be able to get a gun if they really want one? Probably.

 

 

Criminals, perhaps, less likely maybe, but if they really want one. It's the mentally ill that likely will be more effected.

[Orange 'n Black]

 
Really because well regulated doesn't mean your rights are being infringed.
 
Try again

"Well regulated" in this context and in the language of the time means "well equipped." That definition was well established by the framers and has been upheld by SCOTUS on multiple occasions. It has nothing to do with organization or oversight, and the right to keep and bear arms is not dependent on the well regulated clause. Your interpretation is incorrect.

[Jamie_B]

"Well regulated" in this context and in the language of the time means "well equipped." That definition was well established by the framers and has been upheld by SCOTUS on multiple occasions. It has nothing to do with organization or oversight, and the right to keep and bear arms is not dependent on the well regulated clause. Your interpretation is incorrect.

 

And yet we have lawful background checks (regulation) so I disagree.

[Orange 'n Black]

 

And yet we have lawful background checks (regulation) so I disagree.

 

You can disagree with fact... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/District_of_Columbia_v._Heller D.C. vs Heller held that the prefatory clause ("well regulated militia") does not constrain the operative clause ("keep and bear arms") no matter how you interpret the prefatory (there are many interpretations). It furthermore defines the "militia" as all American males physically capable of self defense, regardless of any organization. So, using the prefatory clause to argue that the Second Amendment self-limits the right to keep and bear arms is a non sequitur.

 

As to "regulation," we consent by social contract to have all of our rights regulated. The very basis of American government is that we are endowed with certain inalienable rights - the government does not grant them, but we consent to reasonable regulation for the sake of organized society. The Second Amendment entails one of those rights, that to self defense.

[Justice]

what about the Newton shootings..the guy killed his mom yet they considered the mom a radical militiea..she had guns and stored up food..so everybody who does that is considered extreme..hmm..the government has no right to decide what your gun is used for. also, the newton shootings they guy who did it was supposed to be mentally ill...I think he was set up..he wore a bulletproof vest..why would he wear a bulletproof vest, if he was going to kill himself...hmmm think on this.

[oldschooler]

*sigh*

 

 

I don't know what the fuck is wrong with some people. I swear, I just can't wrap my head around their thinking. 

 

 

First off, let me address Amish. You seem pretty full of vitriol for some damned reason. 

 

I would think having 90 percent of the public being for something having "the support". 

 

I also don't understand how the majority of Senators can vote Yes on something, but because they didn't

have a certain Majority, it gets shot down? 

 

Justice, you need to bow out of the conversation. Or stay off the conspiracy sites. You're not doing yourself 

or your side any favors. You look very naive and uneducated. 

 

Anyway, I hope come next election time that people remember who voted against something an overwhelming 

Majority supported. Who are they there to represent? The people that voted them in? Or the Gun manufacturers? 

 

Still ashamed of my Government. 

[Justice]

*sigh*

 

 

I don't know what the fuck is wrong with some people. I swear, I just can't wrap my head around their thinking. 

 

 

First off, let me address Amish. You seem pretty full of vitriol for some damned reason. 

 

I would think having 90 percent of the public being for something having "the support". 

 

I also don't understand how the majority of Senators can vote Yes on something, but because they didn't

have a certain Majority, it gets shot down? 

 

Justice, you need to bow out of the conversation. Or stay off the conspiracy sites. You're not doing yourself 

or your side any favors. You look very naive and uneducated. 

 

Anyway, I hope come next election time that people remember who voted against something an overwhelming 

Majority supported. Who are they there to represent? The people that voted them in? Or the Gun manufacturers? 

 

Still ashamed of my Government. 

why do you use the F word when you post? it is a proven statistic that when people use the F word all the time they have a lower education..So I am more educated then..As far as people being for something I could work any poll in my favor..does not take much to do that...Next...