All Forums > General Discussion > Non-Sports > High-Capacity Assault Weapons
This post has a rating of , which is below the default threshold.
12/24/2012 7:49 AM
Yes, the Bill of Rights "clarifies" the Constitution. It does not "clarify" the Declaration of Independence.

Two different documents, each with a separate and distinct purpose, written 11 years apart.

I think we are discussing two different things. I am not debating the chronology of the documents, nor am I trying to apply the Bill of Rights as an ammendment to the Declaration. What I am attempting to state is that the founding documents, Declaration of Independence, Articles of the Confereration, Constitution, Bill of Rights, are all one in the same in ideology and thus support/reinforce each other. Regardless of the intent/purpose for which they were written, there is a unity in the documents and that is one of ideology. That ideology is that there are natural/inalienable rights that no government may take away from the individual. In their own way they may attempt to acknowledge, legislate, protect/defend or define this ideology, but nonetheless, they are all based on natural rights. The second ammendment is thus an inalienable right.

12/26/2012 3:11 PM
http://www.app.com/article/20121226/NJNEWS18/312260078/Gun-control-poll-Most-want-stricter-laws

I think the crisis is over. The 2nd Amendment is safe. The left missed the window.

Americans are against an assualt gun ban.

Americans are split on new gun laws vs enforcing existing laws.

and even the simplistic question of "stricter gun laws" doesnt attract large support and I believe will fade soon.

You can all stop worrying and go home and clean your guns!
12/26/2012 4:12 PM
Because we all need high powered assault weapons and nearly unlimited quantities of ammunition to prepare for the zombie apocalypse?
12/26/2012 8:47 PM
Laugh now but you'll be wishing for some bullets soon enough....


12/27/2012 8:23 AM
As a side note, I don't think my family has ever discussed guns.   Yet it was a topic over Christmas dinner.   Maybe we just like to shoot ****.
12/27/2012 7:13 PM
And no one on the left seems to want to address the 600 pound elephant in the room.

That 10 years of the Clinton AG ban did nothing to stop violent crime, murders or mass shootings.
12/28/2012 10:35 AM
In other words: your right to have the ability to fire 30 rounds in 30 seconds without changing a mag/clip trumps the right of 20 first graders to be alive to celebrate Christmas with their families.

Good to know where your priorities are.
12/28/2012 10:58 AM
Can we still murder a classroom full of first graders with two shotguns and bag of ammo?   Or have we taught them to be fearless ninjas when confronted with a gun-weidling madman?
12/28/2012 10:59 AM
IOW, you've not provided a solution, you've provided a knee-jerk reaction.

Which does about nothing.
12/28/2012 11:38 AM
Posted by tecwrg on 12/28/2012 10:35:00 AM (view original):
In other words: your right to have the ability to fire 30 rounds in 30 seconds without changing a mag/clip trumps the right of 20 first graders to be alive to celebrate Christmas with their families.

Good to know where your priorities are.
I want to talk about real life solutions to problems like this that may actually work.

The same people that have wanted to ban guns since the 70s come out whenever they see a tragedy they can exploit.
12/28/2012 11:49 AM
Why do YOU need the right to purchase 36 guns and 18,000 rounds of ammunition in a single calendar year (which was YOUR proposed solution).  How is THAT going to actually work?
12/28/2012 12:31 PM
Would TWO shotguns and a bag of shells produce the SAME results?

Or have we taught first graders to be fearless ninjas when confronted with a gun-weidling madman?
12/28/2012 6:16 PM
Posted by tecwrg on 12/28/2012 11:49:00 AM (view original):
Why do YOU need the right to purchase 36 guns and 18,000 rounds of ammunition in a single calendar year (which was YOUR proposed solution).  How is THAT going to actually work?
As I stated before most people wouldnt do that every month, just gives them the right if they needed it on a specific month. Otherwise you will find people buying ammo every month just to prepare if they might need it.

I made a proposal to set some limits.

The left isnt about negotiating.

You need to ban as many guns as possible while the image of the shooting is in peoples minds.

After they forget that they will again ask you why you want to take our guns away!
12/28/2012 8:43 PM
First, I'm not "the left".  I'm slightly right of center, on average.  Varies on the specific topic.

Second, what do you think a reasonable yearly limit on the number of guns and rounds of ammunition would be?
of 54
All Forums > General Discussion > Non-Sports > High-Capacity Assault Weapons

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

Popular on WhatIfSports site: Baseball Simulation | College Basketball Game | College Football Game | Online Baseball Game | Hockey Simulation | NFL Picks | College Football Picks | Sports Games

© 1999-2014 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.