Thread: Ultimate Test of Civility ~ 2nd Amendment

Originally Posted by rickw

The phrase "the right of the people , shall not be infringed" appears in some form maybe four times in the first ten amendments of the Constitution. Why is it that when it comes to the second amendment, it suddenly doesn't mean "the people"?

It does, but why do you ignore the first part of the amendment where it's associated with maintainng a militia? You can't simply pretend it's not there, and that accountsfor the different treatment. If te amendment didn't include that language, I might agree with you.

Originally Posted by Joe Lerch

It does, but why do you ignore the first part of the amendment where it's associated with maintainng a militia? You can't simply pretend it's not there, and that accountsfor the different treatment. If te amendment didn't include that language, I might agree with you.

This brings up the definition of milita, wich is a whole seperate sub-argument in itself. It is my understanding that the definition of what constituted a milita was left to the decree of the individual states. In some states I think it was restricted to landholders while in others it was every able bodied adult male while in still others the milita constituted only those who volunteered to serve. I guess that today the milita could be as few people as those who serve in the states own little army (who has official ones any more) or as many as every voting age adult. Its kind of open to interpetation.

Bill I agree that the Arabs must be stopped, unfortunately my best ideas either involved nuclear weapons or chemical castration...so Im not the best person to ask. My idea for our border crossing problems is a shoot to kill policy whether it be through automated means or heavily armed men, most people get angry over that stance. Clearly I dont have all the answers, but I guess no one does.

However, regardless of my ideals or anyone elses, I fail to see how taking away our rights as citizens to heavy firepower solves anything at all.

Originally Posted by JLStorm

My idea for our border crossing problems is a shoot to kill policy whether it be through automated means or heavily armed men, most people get angry over that stance.

I like that idea, my plan was to sell hunting Licenses but that tends to go over at partys like a lead baloon.

Originally Posted by JLStorm

Bill I agree that the Arabs must be stopped, unfortunately my best ideas either involved nuclear weapons or chemical castration...so Im not the best person to ask. My idea for our border crossing problems is a shoot to kill policy whether it be through automated means or heavily armed men, most people get angry over that stance. Clearly I dont have all the answers, but I guess no one does.

I humbly submit that when we start talking about nuclear annihilation or chemical castration of an entire ethnic group, we fail a bigger test of civility than the one this thread was supposed to be about.

This whole issue of the ugly american cracks me up

Excuse me if the next few statments sound a little overly nationlistic or over the top:

We as the wolds most powerful nation have behaved far more civily than any superpower in the history of man.

The Greeks tried to take over the known world. The Romans tried to take over the world. The Catholic church took over all of Europe and tried to spread further only to be stopped by the Arabs. The French also conqured till they were stopped and the English when it was there turn oppressed native peoples the world over untill their empire fell. Now its our turn.

We could have kept and ruled half of Europe as the Russians did as well as kept part of Asia after WWII yet we passed. We could be ruling Afganistan right now, we could be lording it over Iraq ruling with an oppressive fist yet we keep trying to build up their govt and come home without leaving too big a mess. Sill as you say we are hated the world over for our arrogance.

We might as well just go out and have a nice little conquering spree the world couldn't hate us any more.

"what are we going to do tonite Brain"
"the same thing we do every night Pinky, Try to take over the world"

Originally Posted by Wildtim

This whole issue of the ugly american cracks me up

Excuse me if the next few statments sound a little overly nationlistic or over the top:

We as the wolds most powerful nation have behaved far more civily than any superpower in the history of man.

The Greeks tried to take over the known world. The Romans tried to take over the world. The Catholic church took over all of Europe and tried to spread further only to be stopped by the Arabs. The French also conqured till they were stopped and the English when it was there turn oppressed native peoples the world over untill their empire fell. Now its our turn.

We could have kept and ruled half of Europe as the Russians did as well as kept part of Asia after WWII yet we passed. We could be ruling Afganistan right now, we could be lording it over Iraq ruling with an oppressive fist yet we keep trying to build up their govt and come home without leaving too big a mess. Sill as you say we are hated the world over for our arrogance.

We might as well just go out and have a nice little conquering spree the world couldn't hate us any more.

"what are we going to do tonite Brain"
"the same thing we do every night Pinky, Try to take over the world"

Do you think we could make france our new nuclear test ground, Nevada is so pretty afer all???

I think that Bill's sensitivity is in part due to the state in which we both live. Some time in the last 45 years, the NRA has become a demon with members that are "Right Wing wackos". When I was in high school, one of the teachers started a rifle club. This was Los Angeles Unified. Now, if a school has an ROTC, the color guard doesn't even carry a toy gun. I was taught to shoot at an indoor range at a high school by LAPD. Now, if you are carrying a gun within 1000(?) feet of a school, they just take you to jail. When I was in high school, I would carry a pocket knife. Now, a student that has a nail clipper with a built in file gets expelled. A knife on school grounds with a blade in excess of 2.5(?) inches is a felony.

I would guess that respect for individual freedoms and ideas as well as respect for the individual has declined. Some people have the idea that because they are offended by something like a gun; then nobody should be allowed to have a gun. Unfortunately, if these people are in power and have a voice, they can force the issue. One of our U.S Senators had a CCW. However, she sponsered a bill to eliminate ownership of handguns in one of our major cities.

Tort law is based on what a reasonable man would do. The phrase "the right of the people , shall not be infringed" appears in some form maybe four times in the first ten amendments of the Constitution. Why is it that when it comes to the second amendment, it suddenly doesn't mean "the people"? There was a case around 1935, involving a shotgun, that is widely cited as a decision that poeple ment the army. Those that use this explaination , never read the case. The U.S. 5th Circuit Court of Appeals, upheld the Second Amendment to mean PEOPLE.

"Here is my take on guns. Everyone should have a gun and know how to use it, with one single rule for the ownership... each person is held accountable for its use. Here's a catch phrase that California uses for the commission of crimes. 'Use a gun and you're done.'" The State dances all around enforcement when it comes to murder during a crime. It is generally 25 to life. With use of television, weight rooms etc. I like the idea of Pelican Bay. Lockdown 23 hours a day and no prisoner interaction. I think this idea was first tried at Port Arthur, Tazmania.

Rick

Randy, bad guys won't have guns if there are non to be had. Well there will be SOME but if nobody's allowed to own a handgun they'd had to rely on smuggled guns and guns stolen from policing agencies, which would GREATLY reduce handgun availability to criminals. Those few who opt to use their guns would get more police attention due to the public outrage and be more likely to get caught.

Originally Posted by FiReSTaRT

Randy, bad guys won't have guns if there are non to be had. Well there will be SOME but if nobody's allowed to own a handgun they'd had to rely on smuggled guns and guns stolen from policing agencies, which would GREATLY reduce handgun availability to criminals. Those few who opt to use their guns would get more police attention due to the public outrage and be more likely to get caught.

Agreeing to disagree...study prohibition in the USA. The current drug situation. If there is a want, there will be a provider. I have over 20 switchblade knives. They have been illegal my entire life. Picking them up was as easy as a minor obtaining beer.

I do want to add that our perceptions are different from Bill's in one very specific way, or at least my perception. I have never had to point a gun at another human being, and have my life depend on it. I have a co-worker who spent time in the military and has 3 confirmed "kills". Two weeks ago, he pulled the plug on his father-in-law, who was terminal with cancer. When he told me about the experience, I told him that if he needed to talk, I was always available. His response? "No, this made sense. The man was suffering in ways we can't imagine." I can't fathom having to make those decisions.

RT