« First « Previous Comments 954 - 993 of 1,445 Next » Last » Search these comments
Wall Street Silver
@WallStreetSilv
The M134 Mini Gun ...
There’s 5 rounds in between tracers.🔥🔥🔥
A little duct tape and WD-40 will have her running good as new.
Activist David Hogg: Americans ‘Have No Right to a Gun’
https://www.breitbart.com/2nd-amendment/2023/02/26/activist-david-hogg-americans-no-right-gun/
“A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.”
Hogg argues that the 2nd. Amendment only applies to the 'militia,' which he defines as the National Guard of the individual states. He misses the clear language that grants the right TO the PEOPLE.
ALL totalitarian governments, throughout modern history, have removed guns from their people, which they went on to enslave.
Odd, when I was in the military, we had fully automatic weapons.
Credit card provider Discover Financial Services will begin tracking gun purchases made by its customers from April onward.
The company will allow its network to track purchases made using payment cards at gun stores.
The move has triggered criticism that such activity leads to targeting gun owners.
HeadSet says
Odd, when I was in the military, we had fully automatic weapons.
Spray and pray has been determined to be too religious.
How the British 'Gun Control' Program Precipitated the American Revolution
When people think of the causes of the American War for Independence, they think of slogans like “no taxation without representation” or cause célèbre like the Boston Tea Party.
In reality, however, what finally forced the colonials into a shooting war with the British Army in April 1775 was not taxes or even warrant-less searches of homes and their occupation by soldiers, but one of many attempts by the British to disarm Americans as part of an overall 'gun control' program, according to David B. Kopel.
Furthermore, had the American colonies lost their war for independence, the British government intended to strip them of all their guns and place them under the thumb of a permanent standing army.
In his paper titled “How the British 'Gun Control' Program Precipitated the American Revolution,” Kopel claims that various 'gun control' policies by the British following the Boston Tea Party, including a ban on firearm and gunpowder importation, tells us not only the purpose of the Second Amendment, but its relevance within the context of today’s 'gun control' debate.
“The ideology underlying all forms of American resistance to British usurpations and infringements was explicitly premised on the right of self-defense of all inalienable rights,” Kopel writes. “From the self-defense foundation was constructed a political theory in which the people were the masters and government the servant, so that the people have the right to remove a disobedient servant. The philosophy was not novel, but was directly derived from political and legal philosophers such as John Locke, Hugo Grotius, and Edward Coke.”
Kopel writes that two important things underlined the American response to the British policies. One was the practical concept of self-defense, which British disarmament measures was making more difficult. The other, and more relevant concept, was that “Americans made no distinction between self-defense against a lone criminal or against a criminal government.”
« First « Previous Comments 954 - 993 of 1,445 Next » Last » Search these comments
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
Couple things to note in there:
1. The specific mention of a militia being the reason for the need to bear arms.
2. The 2nd Amendment never mentions the word gun at all.
So, what exactly is the definition of "arms"?
In 1755 Dr. Johnson’s Dictionary of the English Language was first published. It defined “arms” as “weapons of offence, or armour of defence.”
Weapons of offence would seem to include pretty much anything and everything, from knives to nuclear weapons. The US has already seen fit to ban some weapons of offence so the 2nd Amendment clearly has not been interpreted strictly as meaning that the US cannot ban all "arms". Therefore, the 2nd Amendment does not guarantee citizens the right to own whatever weapons they choose.
So it then becomes a question of which weapons should be banned, which should be strictly regulated, and which should be lightly regulated or not at all. Like anything else, we should weigh an individual's right with society's right. When looked at in that manner, it becomes very difficult to justify why fully automatic or semi automatic rifles should be allowed. What purpose do they serve an individual? And why would that purpose outweigh the extreme damage those weapons have cased society??
Patrick thinks the Chamber of Commerce is the worst organization, and he may be correct, but the NRA is not far behind.