Should the right to bear arms be unconditional?

[osan]

I think he just wants some effort to ensure responsible gun ownership, rather than just telling everyone to grab a gun and start shooting!

In my 52 years on this earth I have never once heard anyone make such a statement and I do a whole LOT of shooting with a whole LOT of people from a whole LOT of different places.

Now, whether it's up to the state to create mandatory gun training for all owners, or the parents' responsibility to teach their children...that's where it gets a bit touchy.

No, it does not. Not in the least. The way is clear. A right is a right and can NEVER be legitimately regulated in any fashion whatsoever. If you hand a gun over to a newbie without giving them the basic rules beforehand and they shoot someone, YOU are responsible for the disaster. No law of any form can make a dumbass smart. Rights are absolute and morally inviolable. That some people violate the rights of others does not make the violation correct, all laws to the contrary notwithstanding.

 

[osan]

Fuck lists!

Like minded people ignore authority.

Jesus, you need to get your head straight. The blanket nature of the statement is worrisome. Not all authority is bad. When a bank robber shoots your manky ass I bet you won't be ignoring their authority to find, arrest, try, convict, sentence, and imprison the guy who ventilated you, eh?

There is duly constituted authority and there is that which has been usurped. If your statement had referred to the latter, I would be in full agreement with it.

People need to be careful with not only what they say, but how they say it. Subtle errors cause fundamental shifts in meaning. Language is a devilish enough thing when everyone is so very careful and proper in its use. Short of that, things start going amok in short order. Just look at politics.

 

[osan]

I'm a stickler for freedom from government oppression.

I'm fine with training, but not mandatory gov't or state sponsored training.

I might point out that not every person needs formal training. Likewise, some people will be a danger to themselves and others no matter how much training they receive. That does not nullify their inborn right to self defense and the axiomatic right to the means of that defense.

 

[Elm]

2 questions on gun ownership....


Do you think people convicted of violent crimes should be allowed to own or bear arms following their conviction?

Do you think a person should be allowed to carry, concealed or openly, while they are drinking alcohol? Should there be a limit like driving? If so, what should it be?

1. Yes.

2. Yes. I do carry concealed or openely while drinking - its already legal in my state.

 

[Kalashnikov Josh]

There is duly constituted authority and there is that which has been usurped. If your statement had referred to the latter, I would be in full agreement with it.

I like you Osan.
Your both wise and you know how to make a point.

Don't be a firearms elitists. "I am trained therefore only I can have one" I recall the immortal words of a DEA officer "I'm the only one in this room professional enough to have this gun" who then proceeds to bust a cap in his own leg YouTube - DEA Agent Shoots Himself.

AHHHAAAhahahahahahahahahaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!!!!!!!!

No WAY!!!!!!

Thats the FIRST time I've ever seen that one.

What a jackass.

 

[puppetmaster]

Yes yes

 

[DamianTV]

Yes.

Yes.

Limits: Common sense. Dont give a loaded gun to a two year old, but dont make a law against it either.

 

[Matt Collins]

YouTube - Richard A. Hamblen Challenges the Feds to Uphold Constitutional Rights

 

[Kalashnikov Josh]

Dammit Matt.

Again?

 

[New2Libertarianism]

If the gov. wanted to mess with me, they could arrest me for a violent crime then that means I can never own a gun. No restrictions on any right!

 

[pcosmar]

If the gov. wanted to mess with me, they could arrest me for a violent crime then that means I can never own a gun. No restrictions on any right!

No, it does not require a violent crime. Or a crime at all, for that matter.

Write a bad check. Felony=no guns
busted for a little weed. Felony=no gun

Argue with you wife or kids. Lautenberg Act=no guns

Piss in an alley. felony= no guns and put on a sex offender list.

 

[Kalashnikov Josh]

No, it does not require a violent crime. Or a crime at all, for that matter.

Write a bad check. Felony=no guns
busted for a little weed. Felony=no gun

Argue with you wife or kids. Lautenberg Act=no guns

Piss in an alley. felony= no guns and put on a sex offender list.

Yep.
Thats what happens when you take an inalienable right and turn it into a government administered privilege.
Government gets to decide who has the privilege rather than respecting a right.

For your own good of course,to stop "those evil people" (and THAT list grows longer almost yearly) from having guns.

Once upon a time that was both Hitler and Stalins rationale for 'gun control' too.
Then,after they got what they wanted-total monopoly on the use of force-they went about systematically killing more innocent people than cancer.

Speaking of La-Dee-Da Lautenburg,his bill,stalled in committee thankfully,called the "Denying Firearms and Explosives to Dangerous Terrorists Act of 2009" is truly terrifying.

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h111-2159

He wants to deny people their Second Amendment rights if they are found on the Justice Departments' secret terrorist watch lists.
Translation-he wants to deny you your rights based on secret lists.

Also for your own good,you know.
To protect you from those evil Constitution loving homegrown hate mongers......

 

[Matt Collins]

YouTube - Richard A. Hamblen Challenges the Feds to Uphold Constitutional Rights

 

[Matt Collins]

http://www.humblelibertarian.com/2010/04/hamblen-vs-united-states-case-brief.html

 

[osan]

Same - with one exception. The right to firearm ownership might be limited by the state if it can also limit the right to vote for convicted felons.

Voting is not really a right. It is a privilege of citizenship. Were it a fundamental right then anyone on US soil at election time should be allowed to participate.

 

[MelissaWV]

Zombie thread is stinky and redundant.

 

[osan]

I like you Osan.
Your both wise and you know how to make a point.

Why thank thee.

AHHHAAAhahahahahahahahahaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!!!!!!!!

No WAY!!!!!!

Thats the FIRST time I've ever seen that one.

What a jackass.

I'm on dialup these days ... is this the one where the idiot is in front of a 3rd grade class, tells them that nobody there except him is qualified to so much as think about a gun and then unceremoniously proceeds to drill himself? If so, then yeah, he is a first-class schmuck.

 

[osan]

Owning a weapon is a responsibility. A serious responsibility.

I would not a first time user to walk onto a shooting range with a loaded weapon.

Yet...

Odd... I've done precisely that more times than I could count on all my fingers and toes. Not a single mishap in the bunch. You're way too nervous to be a gun owner.

 

[osan]

I am not against gun ownership.

I advocate responsible gun ownership.

What's the problem?

Your apparent notion of "responsible" is so.... nervous. You obviously believe in prior restraint and arbitrary regulation of a right that is as fundamental as breathing. That's just kooky.

 

[osan]

Sorry you got that impression.

I'd prefer to stand side by side with a shooter, rather than be shot in the back by a boof-head.

I'd rather stand side by side with an idiot than be shot by a pro.

Seriously, what's your point?