WVU defending national champ, #1 and looking to repeat

[EERNSC]

Well..I guess this where the disagreement is...I respect your opinion...that is meant with sincerity..I am on the other side of the fence beleiving there is no place for armour piercing rounds on the streets and automatic weapons...I have no idea where you live, but just recently there was a mall shooting here in the DC area..the shooter was able to get off several rounds in no time and inflict a lot of damage with in seconds...if the gun was not automatic..then the percentages of damge inflicted would have drastically been reduced.......an the heels of that a DC cop was shot with a armour piercing round went right thru his vest...why would someone need that to hunt game with??

I appreciate the sentiment of respect and I assure you that it is mutual. There is nothing wrong with disagreement on a controversial subject.
As "MIKE" stated earlier, there is a big difference between a semi auto and a fully auto weapon.
Also I agree that there are many things that do not belong on the streets that are otherwise just fine when used responsibly. But I also believe that the personal rights of one should not be infringed upon in order to appease the fears of another. I do not have the answers for the gun debate. I only know that the 2nd Amendment grants me certain rights as a citizen and as long as it is still part of the Constitution I shall claim those rights.

 

[DCWV4life]

I will throw a couple of questions out there, since this does seem to be the most respectful I have heard people be on this subject:

Where does it say in the contitution that we cannot have a national gun registry or how a registry infringes on our rights?
Where does it say in the contitution you have the right to any type of magazine or ammunition?

Before I am labeled a left wing tree hugger just for asking a couple of questions, I would like to point out I am a former combat Marine who helps organize my local republican party and a gun owner.

 

[Slaton10]

First off it was not an Automatic gun. The difference between a SIMI-AUTOMATIC and an AUTOMATIC is that the AUTOMATIC keeps shooting with one pull of the trigger. None of these shootings have been done with an AUTOMATIC. A SEMI-AUTOMATIC shoots a round with each pull of the trigger. Learn the difference, not what the media tells you.

It does not take an Armour piercing bullet to go thru a vest, just about any center fire rifle ammunition will go thru a vest.

"why would someone need that to hunt game with?" Well this is where the left gets things confused, NO WHERE in the second amendment does it protect MY RIGHT to own a hunting gun. It protects my right to own a gun to fight off a tyrannous government. The right to bear arms SHALL NOT be infringed upon. You tell me where it say I have a right to a hunting gun?

So you own a gun to start your own Militia??....

 

[Slaton10]

I will throw a couple of questions out there, since this does seem to be the most respectful I have heard people be on this subject:

Where does it say in the contitution that we cannot have a national gun registry or how a registry infringes on our rights?
Where does it say in the contitution you have the right to any type of magazine or ammunition?

Before I am labeled a left wing tree hugger just for asking a couple of questions, I would like to point out I am a former combat Marine who helps organize my local republican party and a gun owner.

I am with DCW here...I don't have a problem with people owning their own guns...and the questions he is asking are the same ones I would have....

AND BTW..the second ammendment was approved when no one else had more than a Musket Loader...Doubt they had fore sight on what weaponry would look like in the 20th century...

 

[EERNSC]

I will throw a couple of questions out there, since this does seem to be the most respectful I have heard people be on this subject:

Where does it say in the contitution that we cannot have a national gun registry or how a registry infringes on our rights?
Where does it say in the contitution you have the right to any type of magazine or ammunition?

Before I am labeled a left wing tree hugger just for asking a couple of questions, I would like to point out I am a former combat Marine who helps organize my local republican party and a gun owner.

I suppose it all comes down to a matter of interpretation. The 2nd Amendment certainly does not guarantee magazine size or privacy of ownership. However, it certainly does not prohibit them either.
In 1939 in The United States vs. Miller the Supreme Court ruled that the Government could indeed regulate the type of firearm that may be owned...i.e., sawed off shotguns, fully automatics, etc...
Then in 2008 in The District of Columbia vs. Heller the High Court ruled that the ownership of handguns could not be prohibited and that the requirement that all guns within a private dwelling must have trigger locks installed was ruled unconstitutional.

So you see the Supreme Court has struggled with this very same question for years.
The argument that the Framers of the Constitution could not foresee the fire power of modern weapons can also be used against the 1st Amendment. They could have never foreseen the fire power of the internet and social media vehicles and their ramifications. Now I don't know of anyone actually being killed by the internet but it is absolutely injurious and vilifying. Examples of young teens committing suicide due to online "bullying" are case in point.

 

[WVUDAD]

The reason the 2nd amendment was put in the constitution is simple, and that reason is: people should be able to take down an unjust oppressive government and install a just government. THAT means not that the government should have nukes, and we should be armed only with Kentucky long rifles, but rather that we should be able to arm ourselves with whatever we deem necessary to take the nation back from a rogue president, an unfair congress, or any dictator that tries to take over. It has NOTHING to do with hunting, target shooting, or even self defense, if Washington, Addams, Jefferson, etal lived today, they would be all for us regular guys being armed with any and all arms that the government has.

By the way, Slaton, if you read Obama's proposals to have background checks on all transfers, it says:
That when I die, my guns are all property of the state, that I can not buy a gun for my children, or grandchildren, that I may not gift a gun to my father. It means I can not sell a gun I no longer need to a friend or my brother. They try to play up gun shows as a place where thugs go to arm themselves, the gun shows I have been to are 95% dealers and they are doing the background checks. I have bought a couple of old single barrel Winchesters from individuals, and hate the thought of the government using tragedies to infringe on my rights and using it to rake in more of my money.

Look at the war on drugs if you want to see what will happen if guns are outlawed or restricted, the average joe will not be armed, the dope dealers will rule the streets.

You are welcome to your opinion, but do not try and say ANYTHING about Obama, Pelosi, Boxer's gun initiatives having ANY common sense about them.

 

[Mike]

I will throw a couple of questions out there, since this does seem to be the most respectful I have heard people be on this subject:

Where does it say in the contitution that we cannot have a national gun registry or how a registry infringes on our rights?
Where does it say in the contitution you have the right to any type of magazine or ammunition?

Before I am labeled a left wing tree hugger just for asking a couple of questions, I would like to point out I am a former combat Marine who helps organize my local republican party and a gun owner.

There was a supreme leader that told his flock that once upon a time. Then we had WW2

 

[Mike]

So you own a gun to start your own Militia??....

We have our Militia if that is what you want to call it.

 

[Mike]

That gun control is working out well in Chicago....................

 

[DCWV4life]

There was a supreme leader that told his flock that once upon a time. Then we had WW2

Mike you should check you historical data...I am assuming you are talking Hitler, a lot of the gun laws enacted in Germany were in place before Hitlers Nazi part took over. Most of hitlers gun "laws" were in place to take guns from a particular race not a society.

Most quotes on FB and twitter that are attributed to Hitler have no historical accuracy.

 

[WVUDAD]

I will throw a couple of questions out there, since this does seem to be the most respectful I have heard people be on this subject:

Where does it say in the contitution that we cannot have a national gun registry or how a registry infringes on our rights?
Where does it say in the contitution you have the right to any type of magazine or ammunition?

Before I am labeled a left wing tree hugger just for asking a couple of questions, I would like to point out I am a former combat Marine who helps organize my local republican party and a gun owner.

The same place it says we can not have a national speach registry before you may speak, how does censorship infringe on our rights?

The same place it says that freedom of the press is automatically applicable to TV and radio, using some folks logic, TV, radio, internet, etc were not in place in 1787, so the founders did not mean the freedom of PRESS to apply to them..............

 

[WVUDAD]

Mike you should check you historical data...I am assuming you are talking Hitler, a lot of the gun laws enacted in Germany were in place before Hitlers Nazi part took over. Most of hitlers gun "laws" were in place to take guns from a particular race not a society.

Most quotes on FB and twitter that are attributed to Hitler have no historical accuracy.

The point being, that unarmed German citizens is one of the reasons that nothing was done internally to stop the horrible actions of the nazis, had good, moral people been armed there may have been a different set of events. The German citizens were afraid of their government, regardless of whether Hitler or his predecessors had actually been the one to sign the order to disarm the people.

 

[Mike]

The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to allow the subject races to possess arms. History shows that all conquerors who have allowed their subject races to carry arms have prepared their own downfall by so doing. Indeed, I would go so far as to say that the supply of arms to the underdogs is a sine qua non for the overthrow of any sovereignty. So let's not have any native militia or native police.
Read more at snopes.com: Adolf Hitler - To Conquer a Nation


This is what you people don't seem to get. You can go ahead and give up your guns, I don't care, I shall keep mine till my last breath if that is what it takes.


http://www.snopes.com/politics/quotes/disarm.asp#EGlQ7TM5iYz0VM4m.99​

 

[DCWV4life]

The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to allow the subject races to possess arms. History shows that all conquerors who have allowed their subject races to carry arms have prepared their own downfall by so doing. Indeed, I would go so far as to say that the supply of arms to the underdogs is a sine qua non for the overthrow of any sovereignty. So let's not have any native militia or native police.

Read more at snopes.com: Adolf Hitler - To Conquer a Nation​

This is what you people don't seem to get. You can go ahead and give up your guns, I don't care, I shall keep mine till my last breath if that is what it takes.​

Last time I will chime in.....you just used a website that is saying he may have said this during a six month period to support a quote he never used "To conquer a nation, you must first disarm its citizens."

Lastly is is disgraceful to americans in general to compare the leader of the free world to a dictator responsible for 6 million plus deaths in an effort to eradicate an entire culture when talking modern day gun control. It shows ignorance to history and disrespect to the office of the president. I don't even support this president, but I support common sense laws and have yet to lose any of my guns since he has been in office.

They are all responsible gun owners until they are not....

Mike I would stand shoulder to shoulder with you if it ever came to that, but in my opinion it never will....Later gents.
​

 

[Slaton10]

I suppose it all comes down to a matter of interpretation. The 2nd Amendment certainly does not guarantee magazine size or privacy of ownership. However, it certainly does not prohibit them either.
In 1939 in The United States vs. Miller the Supreme Court ruled that the Government could indeed regulate the type of firearm that may be owned...i.e., sawed off shotguns, fully automatics, etc...
Then in 2008 in The District of Columbia vs. Heller the High Court ruled that the ownership of handguns could not be prohibited and that the requirement that all guns within a private dwelling must have trigger locks installed was ruled unconstitutional.

So you see the Supreme Court has struggled with this very same question for years.
The argument that the Framers of the Constitution could not foresee the fire power of modern weapons can also be used against the 1st Amendment. They could have never foreseen the fire power of the internet and social media vehicles and their ramifications. Now I don't know of anyone actually being killed by the internet but it is absolutely injurious and vilifying. Examples of young teens committing suicide due to online "bullying" are case in point.

There are several documented cases of the internet being the enabler behind a felony...several sites where people can hook up and the outcome...not so good..

 

[Mike]

Last time I will chime in.....you just used a website that is saying he may have said this during a six month period to support a quote he never used "To conquer a nation, you must first disarm its citizens."

Lastly is is disgraceful to americans in general to compare the leader of the free world to a dictator responsible for 6 million plus deaths in an effort to eradicate an entire culture when talking modern day gun control. It shows ignorance to history and disrespect to the office of the president. I don't even support this president, but I support common sense laws and have yet to lose any of my guns since he has been in office.

They are all responsible gun owners until they are not....

Mike I would stand shoulder to shoulder with you if it ever came to that, but in my opinion it never will....Later gents.
[/LEFT]

Look at what the leader of the free world did to the Native Americans. Where do you think Hitler got his Idea for concentration camps? Could it have been our concentration camps? Where do you think Hitler got his idea to gas the Jews? Could it have been the from the Native Americans getting blankets wrapped in smallpox? Where did Hitler get the idea to starve them? Maybe us slaughtering the Buffalo?

Those who forget history are doomed to repeat it. This Country is no better then any of the others. One thing I have learned is the best predictor of the future is the past. You guys can make fun of me all you want, but I'm going to cling to my guns.

Why is it all right in our mind to arm ALL Iraqi households with at least one AK47, but then turn around and tell us we can't have one?

How many sovereign nations have we invaded, because we don't like the way they think? Do you really think when the government of this country decides they don't like the way we the people think they won't do it to us?

 

[Slaton10]

Look at what the leader of the free world did to the Native Americans. Where do you think Hitler got his Idea for concentration camps? Could it have been our concentration camps? Where do you think Hitler got his idea to gas the Jews? Could it have been the from the Native Americans getting blankets wrapped in smallpox? Where did Hitler get the idea to starve them? Maybe us slaughtering the Buffalo?

Those who forget history are doomed to repeat it. This Country is no better then any of the others. One thing I have learned is the best predictor of the future is the past. You guys can make fun of me all you want, but I'm going to cling to my guns.

Why is it all right in our mind to arm ALL Iraqi households with at least one AK47, but then turn around and tell us we can't have one?

How many sovereign nations have we invaded, because we don't like the way they think? Do you really think when the government of this country decides they don't like the way we the people think they won't do it to us?

Hmm...maybe because we are not a Third World Country?...and possibly becuase we are not in a pseudo Civil War?...

 

[Mike]

Last time I will chime in.....you just used a website that is saying he may have said this during a six month period to support a quote he never used "To conquer a nation, you must first disarm its citizens."

Lastly is is disgraceful to americans in general to compare the leader of the free world to a dictator responsible for 6 million plus deaths in an effort to eradicate an entire culture when talking modern day gun control. It shows ignorance to history and disrespect to the office of the president. I don't even support this president, but I support common sense laws and have yet to lose any of my guns since he has been in office.

They are all responsible gun owners until they are not....

Mike I would stand shoulder to shoulder with you if it ever came to that, but in my opinion it never will....Later gents.
[/LEFT]

Hmm...maybe because we are not a Third World Country?...and possibly becuase we are not in a pseudo Civil War?...

I would differ with you on this, the streets of Iraq are safer then the streets of Chicago or Detroit. Iraq was in no civil war till we invaded a Sovereign nation that had done nothing to us.

 

[WVUDAD]

I would differ with you on this, the streets of Iraq are safer then the streets of Chicago or Detroit. Iraq was in no civil war till we invaded a Sovereign nation that had done nothing to us.

Strange how a lot of the crime that is pointed to as a reason for more "common sense" gun control happens in the places with the most "common sense" gun control already in place. Chicago and DC have the harshest gun laws in America, the fewest guns in people's hands, BUT the highest crime rates out there. On a flip note, the places with the least "common sense" gun laws also have the lowest crime rates.

 

[Slaton10]

I would differ with you on this, the streets of Iraq are safer then the streets of Chicago or Detroit. Iraq was in no civil war till we invaded a Sovereign nation that had done nothing to us.

Nice job of spin control...you threw out the question whats the difference between Iraq and the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA!!!!!