keep and bear arms

Status
Not open for further replies.
J

jkomp316

member
Joined
Oct 1, 2006
Messages
161
It doesn’t say, keep and bear ONLY pistols and rifles? It says "arms". At the time it was written, the citizens had access to the same weapons as the government. What would happen now if I tried to keep and bear a tank?

I bring this up because I question the actual worth of a pistol? If the amendment was put in place to "allow" us to revolt if/when needed. I ask, what effect would 10rd pistols and semi auto rifles have on a tank, or other heavy artillery? The only thing I see our “pistols” being used against are fellow citizens, innocent or not.

That said, I DO NOT think we should be without them. I think we should be allowed more versatile weapons. The argument that’s brought up is, “some nut will kill everyone”. The same argument that’s brought up with nuclear weapons. Well… The term following that argument is “mutually assured destruction”. It’s the same reason CCW areas have LESS crime. Criminals who feel they have the "upper hand" are more likley to do bad things. Most people ARE generally good. Despite what you’re told to think. People make bad choices when they feel they have no other choices left.

A loaded pistol in the bedroom is 5 times more likely to kill a loved one, than a criminal. Does that make you sleep better?
 
One of those fairy tale brady statistics? Like the one where anyone up to 21 years old was considered a child?
 
I dont understand why I'm allowed to purchase a handgun. But not a taser gun? That makes absolutley no sense to me. This kind of bureaucracy is whats causing problems in our country. It makes me wonder if "problems" are whats wanted?
 
Why are you worried about owning a tazer? I would MUCH rather have a pistol. IIRC, Tazers are 1 or 2 shot weapons.

I would feel much safer with a multi-shot pistol than a tazer...
 
haha, thanks for the positive support.

I was mearly trying to point out that "ARMS" doesn't just mean pistols/rifles. It can mean anything from taser guns to tanks. I think it means "the proper tool to currently defend our land". Sorry to point it out, but a rifle doesn't hold that claim anymore... Seems like a lost cause to me.
 
I was mearly trying to point out that "ARMS" doesn't just mean pistols/rifles.
Click to expand...

You were regurgitating one of the same old tired anti-gun arguments. I've heard it a hundred times. It's a logical fallacy. You define "arms" to include crew served mobile weapons of war. Then you attack the straw man you have created.

"ARMS" means small arms. Whether or not it includes all shoulder fired arms may be debated. But very few have claimed it should include all mobile, crew served platforms of war. For one thing, you cannot easily "bear" a tank. For another, if the Second is an individual right then it naturally applies to individual weaponry.

In addition, our choice of a tank as an example isn't the best. Aside from the Second, there's absolutely no reason you can't own a tank. Indeed a lot of people do own them. They're vehicles like any other.

I think it means "the proper tool to currently defend our land".
Click to expand...

You may think it means prancing cats. So what?

A loaded pistol in the bedroom is 5 times more likely to kill a loved one, than a criminal. Does that make you sleep better?
Click to expand...

Oh lord. You need to do a little research, boyo. That statistic has been so completely exploded even Kellerman, the anti-gun zealot who first spewed it out, has now distanced himself from it.

http://www.guncite.com/gun_control_gcdgaga.html

I also find it amusing you came up with "five times." That figure seems to change with the wind.

As far as the point about small arms, they have advantages of concealability and portability. It's true they are of limited value once open shooting starts, but there's a lot of ground between peace and open war.
 
Well, I am NOT agaisnt gun ownership. I made that clear.

More questions though...

How many times have you thought about grabbing for your gun? Whenever you hear noises at night? How many times have you actually NEEDED to grab for it?

I think owning a weapon can give people a false sense of security, almost to the point of turning them into the criminal.

I wonder how many gun owners fantasize about laying out an intruder in thier home... Till one day thier brother walks in uninvited, drunk at 3am...
 
Deja Moo

The feeling you've heard this ________ before.

How many times have you thought about grabbing for your gun? Whenever you hear noises at night? How many times have you actually NEEDED to grab for it?
Click to expand...
Since it doesn't appear you're taking a survey, it would seem you're arguing the "paranoia" angle.

I wear a seat belt. The last time I NEEDED a seatbelt was in 1971.

I also keep a fire extinguisher. The last time I NEEDED one was in 1962.

I have an emergency stove. I have food reserves. I have a truck that will handle bad roads and no roads. I have a knife that will do duty as a spear head. I have materials to make a snare. I have emergency fire starting materials. I've never actually NEEDED any of those things. There are people living in the U.S. who would have paid handsomely for those things when their whole infrastructure collapsed. Maybe I will never need them. But it would really suck to need them and not have them.

I think owning a weapon can give people a false sense of security, almost to the point of turning them into the criminal.
Click to expand...
I drive a car that can give me a false sense of racing competence, almost to the point of turning me into a delusional and reckless driver. I have a kindling axe that can give me a false sense of Lizzie Borden Syndrome, almost to the point of turning me into a homicidal axe murdering maniac.

Oddly, none of this has ever happened to me. I wonder if how I conduct myself has more to do with who I am than what things I own.

I wonder how many gun owners fantasize about laying out an intruder in their home... Till one day their brother walks in uninvited, drunk at 3am...
Click to expand...
I wonder how many males fantasize about [hot model here] strolling into their home . . . till one day their sister-in-law walks in . . .

Dude.

Like, it's a friggin' machine, already.

I own a handful of power tools. Saws, drills, stuff like that. I don't run around the neighborhood in a fantasy-powered delusion defacing people's doors and windows.

Why the hell would I? Power tools turn men into crazed uber-hobbyists?

Now, if YOU PERSONALLY have problems with fantasies and compulsions and delusions, then you can go ahead and get whatever help you need.

Your fantasies, however, do not represent the state of mind of the general population.

Most of us out here are quite level-headed and capable of rational conduct and thought.

Just so you know.
 
The closest I have to a fantasy is essentially a battle plan if my home is invaded. Call me crazy but after in a guy in CT watched his wife, and daughters get raped and then set on fire all becuase he could not defend himself I tend to think preparation never hurts. Yes in wealthy supposedly crime free CT suburbs where the super wealthy doctors live this happened it can happen to anyone thus it pays to be prepared. Your much more likely to be a victom of violent crime than you realize.

Further I dont know what kind of firearms owner you are but I would not shoot unless i could identify a target. Ever try putting up dry wall? Ill tell you its a real pain and i dont plan on putting holes in because some shadow looked like the boogey man.

Also i dont know what sort of broken home you grew up in but no one in mine wanders in drunk late at night. I'll give you a safety tip if they make a loud crashing niose and forceably enter they arent your friend if they open the door because they have the key you gave them they are your friend. Its pretty simple accidental shootings are over reported by the media and dont even get me started on so called "gun cleaning accidents".
 
ARMS includes edged weapons

Since the constitution does not specify what is meant by the word 'Arms', it must be interpreted to include all 'bearable' individual arms. That would include pikes, spears, swords and long knives, as well as rifles, shotguns and handguns plus the ammunition.

Most states have laws that deny citizens the right to carry edged weapons with a blade exceeding some specified length, or having two cutting edges. Many also prohibit tazers or stun guns that use high voltage. The reason for these bans is that the SILENT weapons are easily abused by criminals, to attack unsuspecting victims without detection by the rest of society.

When a firearm is discharged, it usually makes enough noise that someone is alerted, and the police are called to check out the disturbance, which may allow a victim to be found and treated before death occurs. Bullet wounds in non-critical areas may be more survivable than cutting or stabbing wounds, that cause a person to bleed out rapidly.

When laws are passed, there are usually good intentions, but the unforeseen consequences can be detrimental, and laws that have bad effects rarely get repealed.

When we comunicate with our elected legislators, we need to remind them that self defense is a natural right, and that it requires tools adequate for the task, whether they are firearms, sticks or knives.
 
Privately owned cannon were not unheard of in the Founding era. IIRC, some of our founders obtained officer's commissions in the Continental Army based entirely on the fact that they owned cannons, and knew how to use them.



Tenche Cox:

"The power of the sword, say the minority..., is in the hands of Congress. My friends and countrymen, it is not so, for THE POWERS OF THE SWORD ARE IN THE HANDS OF THE YEOMANRY OF AMERICA FROM SIXTEEN TO SIXTY. The militia of these free commonwealths, entitled and accustomed to their arms, when compared with any possible army, must be tremendous and irresistible. Who are the militia? Are they not ourselves? Is it feared, then, that we shall turn our arms each man against his own bosom. Congress has no power to disarm the militia. Their swords and every terrible implement of the soldier are the birthright of Americans. The unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state governments but where, I trust in God, it will always remain, in the hands of the people."
Click to expand...

Arms = "swords and every terrible implement of the soldier"

Today, this includes at minimum handguns and rifles equiped for burst, full auto, and grenades, blades of any length, and longarms of any length.

The real fear of the antis is that the correct application of the Miller test will prevail. (In great summary: the miller test says that 2A actually protects at minimum those arms that have military utility)

Tomorrow, it will include phased plasma rifles of at least 40 megawatts.
 
A loaded pistol in the bedroom is 5 times more likely to kill a loved one, than a criminal. Does that make you sleep better?
Click to expand...

I've never believed that, since shootings are not random at all, whether intentional or not. A safe person will bring that chance down to near zero.
 
(jkomp316) How many times have you thought about grabbing for your gun? Whenever you hear noises at night? How many times have you actually NEEDED to grab for it?
Click to expand...
How many times it was actually NEEDED is not the point. It only takes one time, and you never know when that time might be. I never answer knocking on my door without a pistol in hand. The last time this happened, it was someone telling me I had left my keys sticking in the deadbolt. :eek::eek: But something more dire could have happened.
 
Everything

I bring this up because I question the actual worth of a pistol? If the amendment was put in place to "allow" us to revolt if/when needed. I ask, what effect would 10rd pistols and semi auto rifles have on a tank, or other heavy artillery?
Click to expand...

They have everything to do with it.

Case and point; WWII. The “Liberator Pistol”. The gun that took longer to reload than it did to make and was combat accurate only for a few feet. Why then did we make them for the resistance fighters? Simple. Because they were easy to hide on their persons and if the opportunity presented its self, they could use that piece of crap to kill an unsuspecting soldier or cop (whatever Germany called them), pick up his rifle and ammo and then use that rifle.

It’s the use a ____ to fight to your _____ method. Use a pistol to get a rifle, use the rifle to get a MG or a mortar, etc, etc, etc.
 
How many times have you thought about grabbing for your gun? Whenever you hear noises at night? How many times have you actually NEEDED to grab for it?
Click to expand...
How many times have you put on your seatbelt? How many times have you actually needed it?

Horrible argument - better safe than sorry. If you don't pick up the gun and get into the living room and actually find out you do need it, what then?


think owning a weapon can give people a false sense of security, almost to the point of turning them into the criminal.
Click to expand...
I agree with you some here. Many people buy a gun and believe it makes them secure. However, you'll find that the vast majority on this board buy a gun, train with it, and take extra measures to ensure that it does in fact make them more safe.

I wonder how many gun owners fantasize about laying out an intruder in thier home... Till one day thier brother walks in uninvited, drunk at 3am...
Click to expand...
Yeah, that happens all the time.

Rule #4. All that needs to be said.
 
OK...

A loaded pistol in the bedroom is 5 times more likely to kill a loved one, than a criminal. Does that make you sleep better?
Click to expand...

I would like a source for this load of horse apples.

That said, the pistol in my bedroom has saved my life once without being fired. A gun in a citizen’s hands when confronting a criminal is rarely ever fired. A “good” life saved by the mere presence of a gun is often the case, the statistic is in the neighborhood of about 100:1. Meaning that every 100 times a citizen uses a gun to preven a crime or stop one, only once it it fired. There is no hard data on this because most PD’s do not keep statistics of this type of encounter and, frankly, a lot of folks don’t report when this happens because they are afraid that they might get into trouble for pulling a gun.

Swimming pools are 20 times more likely to kill children than a handgun. So how do you swim now?
 
I don't believe the second amendment's reference to bearing arms was intended to only include those arms which one person can pick up and carry. After all, the "shot heard round the world" was fired at British troops who had arrived to confiscate the cannon posessed by the colonists. Cannon were crew served weapons, and I imagine the framers were familiar enough with what was to them quite recent history that they intended cannon to be considered arms.
 
This will be a loaded comment, but I wonder if the British would've considered the colonists.... terrorists? Im sure the Indians did :what:

maybe im just a wannabe peace hippie?
 
Last edited:
jkomp316 wrote:
maybe im just a wannabe peace hippie?
Click to expand...

Yeah, and maybe you started the day by drinking out of the wrong toilet, too. Your entire string of posts here has a rather troll-like bent. It is very much like, if not entirely identical to, a lot of the crappola spewed around by the Brady crowd; provocative, perhaps, but with no redeeming social value.

A loaded pistol in the bedroom is 5 times more likely to kill a loved one, than a criminal. Does that make you sleep better?
Click to expand...

This statistic came from a rather skewed and discredited study done by an anti-gun medical examiner, IIRC
 
NO

This will be a loaded comment, but I wonder if the British would've considered the colonists.... terrorists?
Click to expand...

They called them TRAITORS or SPIES. When captured they were often hung or executed by firing squad...
 
The 5 times number completely ignores all FBI statistics proving the reverse is more accurate.

and hey, here's some actual government numbers on a variety of related subject: http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/guns.htm

interesting quote from an older study:
"A fifth of the victims defending themselves with a firearm
suffered an injury, compared to almost half of those who defended
themselves with weapons other than a firearm or who had no weapon"

At least try and do some research before posting, please.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

M
  • Locked
Right of Militia to keep and bear Arms?
2
Replies
29
Views
1K
BB93YJ
B
O
  • Locked
The Right To Keep & Bear....What?
2
Replies
37
Views
1K
Mr.V.
M
N
  • Locked
The "Permission" to Keep and Bear Arms
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Replies
215
Views
8K
The Real Hawkeye
T
B
  • Locked
Collective right to keep and bear arms?
Replies
18
Views
792
HunterGatherer
H
R
  • Locked
...and bear arms?
2
Replies
31
Views
2K
M203Sniper
M
Back
Top