The 2nd Admendment

[Fulltimer]

Gosh, I guess I missed that happening, Don...To precisely which "weapon" do you refer?......Ben

But let one more weapon be added to the lengthy list of military hardware civilians are restricted from owning and carrying and the right goes off like their hair was on fire.

The Second Amendment is not absolute if any weapon is restricted from "the people" and when it becomes so glaringly obvious another needs to be added, that does not break the 2nd.

[Truckman]

But let one more weapon be added to the lengthy list of military hardware civilians are restricted from owning and carrying and the right goes off like their hair was on fire.

The Second Amendment is not absolute if any weapon is restricted from "the people" and when it becomes so glaringly obvious another needs to be added, that does not break the 2nd.

You repeated what you had previously written, but it doesn't even begin to answer my question, Don...Should I assume you have no answer, or were you showing us your deflection skills again?......Ben

[Fulltimer]

You repeated what you had previously written, but it doesn't even begin to answer my question, Don...Should I assume you have no answer, or were you showing us your deflection skills again?......Ben

No, I was simply pointing out what you claimed to have missed.

[TxMusky]

Deflection would be my guess. First he rants and raves about the Constitution being the main thing that our country needs to follow and then cherry picks one amendment that he believes needs to be done away with? You just can't make this stuff up folks. It's like fighting medusa, a head full of heads and they all take turns speaking.

[Fulltimer]

Deflection would be my guess. First he rants and raves about the Constitution being the main thing that our country needs to follow and then cherry picks one amendment that he believes needs to be done away with? You just can't make this stuff up folks. It's like fighting medusa, a head full of heads and they all take turns speaking.

See, you are doing it again TxMusky. If taking away the right for civilians to possess AR type assault weapons would be doing away with the 2nd Amendment why is taking away the right of civilians to possess the myriad of other weapons of war currently proscribed for civilian use not taking away the 2nd Amendment?

Seems to me under your definition the 2nd Amendment is already gone, repealed by the National Firearms Act of 1934.

[Truckman]

No, I was simply pointing out what you claimed to have missed.

But let one more weapon be added to the lengthy list of military hardware civilians are restricted from owning and carrying and the right goes off like their hair was on fire..

I'll type slower for you, Don...To precisely which "weapon" do you refer?......Ben

[Mike]

....... If taking away the right for civilians to possess AR type assault weapons would be doing away with the 2nd Amendment why is taking away the right of civilians to possess the myriad of other weapons of war currently proscribed for civilian use not taking away the 2nd Amendment?

Seems to me under your definition the 2nd Amendment is already gone, repealed by the National Firearms Act of 1934.

It is very simple. The civilian version of the AR-15 is not a weapon of war. It is simply a semi-automatic rifle. The original, military, version was renamed the M-16. It is a select fire, fully automatic, rifle. Don't confuse the two as so many seem to do.

[Fulltimer]

I'll type slower for you, Don...To precisely which "weapon" do you refer?......Ben

Assault type weapons such as the popular Armalite design. If the carnage continues with other .223 cal semiautomatic, magazine fed weapons they too should be added to the list.

Adding a weapon to the list of noncivilian use devices does not in itself "do away" with the 2nd amendment.

[Truckman]

Assault type weapons such as the popular Armalite design. If the carnage continues with other .223 cal semiautomatic, magazine fed weapons they too should be added to the list.

Adding a weapon to the list of noncivilian use devices does not in itself "do away" with the 2nd amendment.

See Mike's answer above...I have a more recepptive brick wall to talk to at the moment...:...Ben

[Fulltimer]

It is very simple. The civilian version of the AR-15 is not a weapon of war. It is simply a semi-automatic rifle. The original, military, version was renamed the M-16. It is a select fire, fully automatic, rifle. Don't confuse the two as so many seem to do.

I do not confuse the two. The killing efficiency of the AR-15 has been demonstrated quite well in the recent school shootings and the Las Vegas event.

As a defensive weapon, it would be great in case of the zombie apocalypse or if the SWAT forces were trying to arrest you I suppose.

[Wannabe]

Hands and feet kill many more people each year than do guns. Do you want to ban them. Doctors and hospitals kill thousands each year, how about banning those. I will agree that these two banning examples are just as ignorant as banning guns. Hands, feet, Dr.'s, hospitals, and guns do kill people each year, but they also save and help untold thousands more each year. If you want to ban something ban gun free zones, illegal aliens, and terrorist.

[Fulltimer]

Hands and feet kill many more people each year than do guns. Do you want to ban them. Doctors and hospitals kill thousands each year, how about banning those. I will agree that these two banning examples are just as ignorant as banning guns. Hands, feet, Dr.'s, hospitals, and guns do kill people each year, but they also save and help untold thousands more each year. If you want to ban something ban gun free zones, illegal aliens, and terrorist.

Hands and feet, doctors, and hospitals are not designed to kill a large number of people in a short time by weak deranged individuals. When a method is found, agreed upon, and enacted into law to keep these weapons out of the hands of weak, deranged people perhaps assault type weapons could once again be kept and carried by responsible citizens.

[TxMusky]

Any gun can kill a large number of people given a deranged mind and hand holding it and plenty of ammo to feed it. Assault is an action, it is not a particular gun.

If you persist in using assault in that manner, please explain sexual assault! If I had to choose a way to go that one may be worth looking into.

[Fulltimer]

Any gun can kill a large number of people given a deranged mind and hand holding it and plenty of ammo to feed it. Assault is an action, it is not a particular gun.

If you persist in using assault in that manner, please explain sexual assault! If I had to choose a way to go that one may be worth looking into.

If you guys spent just 10% of the effort to find a way to keep weapons out of the hands of deranged individuals as you do trying to convince everyone dead children are a good thing we wouldn't have to have this discussion.

[Wannabe]

That is the crux of the problem right there. There is No way to legislate or regulate deranged individuals from getting weapons. If they desire to do harm they will find a way by hook or crook to obtain weapons. You cannot legislate morality. Like the old saying goes--If there is a Will, there is a Way. My time and effort would have been better spent borrowing Ben's Brick Wall.