Thread: Whats your opinion on automatic weapons?

Originally Posted by pixelfixed

The second gauranteed the right to a single shot musket,not a BAR.

Where does it say that in either the Declaration of Independence or the Constitution?

Where does it say you may have a firearm? It says "arms" that could mean a knife, or your own fists.

Originally Posted by nun2sharp

Where does it say that in either the Declaration of Independence or the Constitution?

Originally Posted by straightrazorheaven

Where does it say you may have a firearm? It says "arms" that could mean a knife, or your own fists.

"Arms" was specifically used to not limit the type of weaponry available to the citizenry, i.e. left intentionally vague so the Congress wouldn't outlaw weapons per se, but rather left it up to the individual States.

Was it now? If that were true there wouldn't be a debate about what they meant. If people are honest they have no idea what was meant (and neither do I).

Originally Posted by mapleleafalumnus

"Arms" was specifically used to not limit the type of weaponry available to the citizenry, i.e. left intentionally vague so the Congress wouldn't outlaw weapons per se, but rather left it up to the individual States.

Originally Posted by straightrazorheaven

Was it now? If that were true there wouldn't be a debate about what they meant. If people are honest they have no idea what was meant (and neither do I).

Go read The Federalist Papers to determine what the Framers meant. That's what the Supreme Court does.

Originally Posted by mapleleafalumnus

Go read The Federalist Papers to determine what the Framers meant. That's what the Supreme Court does.

I don't think that Cold Hard facts are feelings. EVERYBODY who refers to any bill of rights that they weren't around to see written are are resorting to semantics, since they have no idea what was actually meant, a general consensus doesn't make something fact (there was once a general consensus that the Earth was flat, and that the universe revolved around the Earth.). All I can say is that sometimes people choose to ignore the facts in order to support what they believe are their own interests. Archaic documents don't wash with me, I prefer to make my decisions based on what happens in the real world, in the current time. If facts don't sway you, and opinions don't sway you, your mind is made up. As a humanist I view the evidence and then decide what I believe. As a healthcare scientist I am trained to assess facts and I have done so, and made up my own mind. Anything else is superflous. Everyone is entitled to believe what they want to, I just hope nobody ever uses a legally acquired firearm (or illegally) to harm anybody I know, or don't, regardless of what they did.

Originally Posted by straightrazorheaven

I don't think that Cold Hard facts are feelings. EVERYBODY who refers to any bill of rights that they weren't around to see written are are resorting to semantics, since they have no idea what was actually meant, a general consensus doesn't make something fact (there was once a general consensus that the Earth was flat, and that the universe revolved around the Earth.). All I can say is that sometimes people choose to ignore the facts in order to support what they believe are their own interests. Archaic documents don't wash with me, I prefer to make my decisions based on what happens in the real world, in the current time. If facts don't sway you, and opinions don't sway you, your mind is made up. As a humanist I view the evidence and then decide what I believe. As a healthcare scientist I am trained to assess facts and I have done so, and made up my own mind. Anything else is superflous. Everyone is entitled to believe what they want to, I just hope nobody ever uses a legally acquired firearm (or illegally) to harm anybody I know, or don't, regardless of what they did.

So I take it you haven't read The Federalist Papers. Too bad. They were written by Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay -- men who actually crafted the Constitution, and they published these articles to educate the public about what the Constitution actually means. Thus, it is a primer into the Framers' intent, and an excellent one. Do try and read it sometime.

Originally Posted by straightrazorheaven

I don't think that Cold Hard facts are feelings. EVERYBODY who refers to any bill of rights that they weren't around to see written are are resorting to semantics, since they have no idea what was actually meant, a general consensus doesn't make something fact (there was once a general consensus that the Earth was flat, and that the universe revolved around the Earth.). All I can say is that sometimes people choose to ignore the facts in order to support what they believe are their own interests. Archaic documents don't wash with me, I prefer to make my decisions based on what happens in the real world, in the current time. If facts don't sway you, and opinions don't sway you, your mind is made up. As a humanist I view the evidence and then decide what I believe. As a healthcare scientist I am trained to assess facts and I have done so, and made up my own mind. Anything else is superflous. Everyone is entitled to believe what they want to, I just hope nobody ever uses a legally acquired firearm (or illegally) to harm anybody I know, or don't, regardless of what they did.

if you really need clarification on what to keep and bear arms means that Glenn is right. No amount of reason is going to get through to you. Do you really think they mean arms as in attached your body? Put your head back in the sand and remember one famous saying" it is better to be thought an idiot, than to open your mouth and prove it."

I just finished a great read called the history of the american marksman.
Thou not outlined in the second as written,men that formed the Militia at the time (we the people)
Were requiered to provide themselves a rifle of a certain caliber and barrel lenth,40 balls and 1 lb of powder.

I have to say that now the facts have been presented, it seems that the "arguments" being presented by those of you on the Anti-gun side have begun to lose their credibility...

Now you gents have basically resorted to feelings, and semantics, instead of well thought out points, and facts... Yes we know there are few facts to support Gun-Grabbing, mostly they are just political spins on the truth...

When the discussion takes a direction like that, I guess I have to just step away, but to post that the "Arms" in the 2nd Amendment could be fists ??? or muskets, is just not worth my time any longer to read...


To everyone on both sides that presented Intelligent thought out responses backed with Proofs (regardless of souces) thanks for the thoughts...