Active Topics | Member List | Search | Help | Register | Login
The John Byrne Forum
Byrne Robotics > The John Byrne Forum Page of 5 Next >>
Topic: Guns Protect Families (Topic Closed Topic Closed) Post ReplyPost New Topic
Author
Message
John Byrne
Avatar
Grumpy Old Guy

Joined: 11 May 2005
Posts: 132239
Posted: 21 May 2016 at 7:26am | IP Logged | 1  

PEOPLE

Aside from the obvious, how many things can you find wrong with this? Things the NRA will race to sweep under the rug, I'm sure!

Back to Top profile | search
 
Brian Miller
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 28 July 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 30886
Posted: 21 May 2016 at 9:23am | IP Logged | 2  

Odd that as I type this, I'm in line to play laser tag. 
Back to Top profile | search
 
Shane Matlock
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 12 August 2012
Location: United States
Posts: 1760
Posted: 21 May 2016 at 10:38am | IP Logged | 3  

I grew up around guns. Got my first shotgun when I was 12 years old. And never once did anyone in my family get shot with guns, but also never once did we use the guns to protect ourselves either. The guns were used to kill animals. That's pretty much their only purpose. To kill stuff. Anyone who says otherwise is full of it. For the record, I hated hunting, but I have no  problem with it. But there is no question in my mind, that this country needs stronger gun control laws, to keep guns out of the hands of monsters like this guy. 
Back to Top profile | search
 
Rich Marzullo
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 13 January 2011
Location: United States
Posts: 2696
Posted: 21 May 2016 at 11:13am | IP Logged | 4  

The only stronger gun laws we need is to abolish the 2nd amendment. For that to actually happen, we would need a fundamental cultural shift, and that just isn't happening any time soon.
Back to Top profile | search e-mail
 
John Byrne
Avatar
Grumpy Old Guy

Joined: 11 May 2005
Posts: 132239
Posted: 21 May 2016 at 11:19am | IP Logged | 5  

As I have pointed out before, there's a good argument to be made for the Second Amendment being unconstitutional, since it negates all the others.
Back to Top profile | search
 
Rich Marzullo
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 13 January 2011
Location: United States
Posts: 2696
Posted: 21 May 2016 at 11:22am | IP Logged | 6  

Now if only there were anyone brave enough to make that argument in front of the Supreme Court. 

 

EDIT: English is hard.


Edited by Rich Marzullo on 21 May 2016 at 11:23am
Back to Top profile | search e-mail
 
Joe Zhang
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 16 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 12857
Posted: 22 May 2016 at 6:26am | IP Logged | 7  

Guns protect families? Nope. Families protect guns, oftentimes with their lives. 
Back to Top profile | search e-mail
 
Monte Gruhlke
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 03 May 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 3303
Posted: 22 May 2016 at 8:10am | IP Logged | 8  

I believe that the second amendment was written during a time when America had no standing army and it deemed that it was necessary to arm the people so that they may patriotically rise up to defend their nation. 

People who own, secure and use guns responsibly are awesome; but sadly there are a large bunch of idiots out there who have two settings; win an argument and use a gun to win an argument. Idiots? My mistake. I meant murderers.
Back to Top profile | search e-mail
 
John Byrne
Avatar
Grumpy Old Guy

Joined: 11 May 2005
Posts: 132239
Posted: 22 May 2016 at 8:41am | IP Logged | 9  

I believe that the second amendment was written during a time when America had no standing army and it deemed that it was necessary to arm the people so that they may patriotically rise up to defend their nation.

••

But somewhere along the way, some people got it into their heads that the purpose of the Second Amendment was to give We, the People the necessary power to overthrow the government.

Perhaps the most important clause in the Amendment lies in the first thirteen words: A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state... (emphasis added)

The proposed militia(s) must be well regulated. and only governments can regulate. Set yourself up against the government, lose the protection of the Second Amendment. Gotta think the Founding Fathers )most of them) understood that.

As it seems they understood such a circumstance would not always be "necessary" only as protection for the security of a free state -- which means no longer necessary as soon as the country has a standing army, navy, marines, etc. In other words, the Second Amendment pretty much voids itself as soon as there are paid professionals protecting us. Weekend warriors need not apply.

Unfortunately, a RED DAWN mentality seems to prevail, and there are people who genuinely believe those same weekend warriors really could stand against an invading force that had wiped out everything else.

++++

People who own, secure and use guns responsibly are awesome; but sadly there are a large bunch of idiots out there who have two settings; win an argument and use a gun to win an argument. Idiots? My mistake. I meant murderers.

••

In this context, who is truly a "responsible" gun owner? Doesn't the mere fact of owning a gun make one an accessory to these mass killings? Shouldn't "I demand the right the responsible ownership of guns" read more like "Since there are so many irresponsible people in this country, the only sane approach would be for nobody to have guns."*

__________________

* "The bad guys will always get guns." Yes, they will. And if you believe having a "safe" gun in your house -- unloaded, trigger locked, in the gun safe -- is going to help you against them, you must imagine yourself to be the Flash. That "safe" gun will be useless in a home invasion. The bad guys are not going to phone ahead.

Back to Top profile | search
 
Andrew Bitner
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 01 June 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 7480
Posted: 22 May 2016 at 10:37am | IP Logged | 10  

Gun rights advocates also overlook how many gun-related deaths come from negligence, suicide or crimes of passion. Having a gun in the house elevates your chances of being murdered considerably.

It is no accident that Congress *prevents* government agencies from collecting data on gun-related deaths. The NRA does not want that information public.

I cannot imagine the Founders intended the Second Amendment to trump (no pun intended) the others. Government is the ONLY way to regulate any sort of militia, and yet gun advocates insist that citizens can "self-regulate." That privilege exists nowhere else in our legal framework--it's absolute nonsense cooked up to justify owning whatever firepower you please.

Kids are killing themselves with guns left out by "responsible gun owners." They're killing adults and each other. And gun nuts insist on doing away with gun free zones, even though the f*cking NRA itself will not permit guns at its own events. Hypocrisy...or do they know the DANGER of having guns floating around?

Honestly, I'm sick to death of gun advocates and their bleating about their rights. They don't give a damn about the rights of everyone else to be safe from their inferiority complex.

Maybe it's time we demanded OUR rights and did something about it.

Edited by Andrew Bitner on 22 May 2016 at 10:39am
Back to Top profile | search
 
John Byrne
Avatar
Grumpy Old Guy

Joined: 11 May 2005
Posts: 132239
Posted: 22 May 2016 at 11:43am | IP Logged | 11  

Maybe it's time we demanded OUR rights and did something about it.

••

Astonishing, isn't it, that Congress stood up to Big Tobacco (eventually) and Detroit (eventually) but still seem terrified of standing up to the NRA.

Back to Top profile | search
 
Andrew Bitner
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 01 June 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 7480
Posted: 22 May 2016 at 11:52am | IP Logged | 12  

It is astonishing. A majority of the public wants some sensible gun control reform. Congress stymies that, because they're afraid of the NRA's vastly overstated political clout (their support does not often translate into political success for new candidates) and because some of them get lots of money from the NRA and its allies.
I didn't used to be so cynical but it's impossible to deny that some special interests own Washington DC.
Back to Top profile | search
 

Page of 5 Next >>
  Post ReplyPost New Topic
Printable version Printable version

Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot create polls in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

 Active Topics | Member List | Search | Help | Register | Login