"Right to bear arms" should mean ...

by Simon 616 Replies latest members politics

• 

  cedars

  Low-Key

  You're just being pissy because the facts I presented don't support your own feelings on the matter.

  All of the sources are in the appendix.

  The sources used by the text are in the Appendix, but where is the text itself from? There's nothing "pissy" about asking that. If you want us to take the information seriously, at least tell us where you got it from, and help Simon keep this forum free from copyright claims in the process.

  OUTLAW

  They ripped my dog to shreds..He was a big dog..

  Sorry about your dog. Again though, I have to ask, is it REALLY the responsibility of citizens in Canada and the US to carry out pest control on behalf of the local authorities? If a bear came wandering down the street in the UK we would call the authorities and have them dispose of it. Paying taxes to a government that refuses to keep dog-guzzling creatures at arm's length seems preposterous.

  Cedars
• 

  Low-Key Lysmith

  OK, cedars. I'll edit the post so that it reflects where I got it from. I seriously doubt the copyright owner will have any problem with me spreading these facts to the ignorant.
• 

  james_woods

  I think this thread illustrates the fundamental difficulty of the British to understand the American way of thinking.

  We are much the same, but also much very different.
• 

  cedars

  Low-Key

  And yes, I read ALL of it. Every word. They are just as valid as Besty's redundant numbers.

  Did you really think that last part through? And in what way were Besty's numbers redundant?

  OK, cedars. I'll edit the post so that it reflects where I got it from. I seriously doubt the copyright owner will have any problem with me spreading these facts to the ignorant.

  Great.

  Cedars
• 

  Low-Key Lysmith

  I missed the editing time limit, but, here you go:

  Friday, 19 September 2008 03:14 Last Updated on Friday, 20 July 2012 15:33 Written by Administrator

  Mar 2004

  Gun Control Fact-Sheet 2004 / From Gun Owners Foundation

  by Gun Owners Foundation 8001 Forbes Place, Suite 102 Springfield, VA 22151
• 

  cedars

  james_woods

  I think this thread illustrates the fundamental difficulty of the British to understand the American way of thinking.

  The last time I checked, not ALL Americans are against tighter gun laws. If I am mistaken, this would be quite a revelation to me. Are you saying ALL Americans are happy with the status quo? Including the grieving parents in Connecticut? Or are you only truly American if you're a signed up member of the NRA?

  Cedars
• 

  Low-Key Lysmith

  And in what way were Besty 's numbers redundant?

  Because he's posted them about 3,000 times. OK. We get it. Life is better in the UK. You are all a lot more peaceful than us barbaric Americans.
• 

  sammielee24

  Look, I don't care if anything I say sounds logical. I'm not the one trying to compare a car to a gun. That's irrational.

  I"ve been around guns. Guns used for hunting. I've shot them. I've had them pointed at my head. I've walked the plank. What I'm saying is that out in the bush when there's a chance I have to face a wild animal, its a different ball game. A person living in the city, who has ten guns in the house, two in the car, carries one on their person - certainly isn't out there scared of a pack of wolves chasing them down. They are scared of their neighbor. A country that filled with fear of their own people is NOT a free country.

  If you need a gun because you somehow believe the 2nd ammendment means you can protect your property - fine. One gun, registered, insured and kept in the house for security - not with a thousand rounds of ammo and a machine gun - just in case along with some in the car and in your purse or under your arm.

  For anyone that thinks the 2nd ammendment can never be changed - why not? Any ammendment can be made to the constitution for the improvement to the majority in a society.

  The number of prescribed drugs in the USA is either the highest in the world or second highest - I think that has a huge factor in some of these cases but we have a call for more mental health services instead of some sort of gun control. Problem is - you have no way of knowing if someone is mentally ill - the only way to ensure you tap into everyones psyche is to prozac out every man, woman and child and then let the guns flow freely. Either way - wouldn't it be nice and really novel if there were actual recognization of the need to change SOMETHING and to actually agree on that and then work toward it? People who really can't see the need - who really can't empathize or sympathize with those parents - 40 pound kids shot up 5 times with an assault weapon that tore them to shreds - babies who had to be left on the floor of their schoolroom in a pool of blood for a day because they were part of a crime scenet - if after all that, you can't admit that SOMETHING needs to be examined and changed, then I hope that the same thing never ever happens to you that forces you to think back on when you could have been part of the discussion on change. sammieswife
• 

  cedars

  Low-Key

  Gun Control Fact-Sheet 2004 / From Gun Owners Foundation

  Ah, so it was written by the Gun Owners Foundation. I wondered by the material was so objective and unbiased!

  Thank all the same for naming your source. I appreciate your honesty.

  Because he's posted them about 3,000 times. OK. We get it. Life is better in the UK. You are all a lot more peaceful than us barbaric Americans.

  You and I clearly have different understandings as to what the word "redundant" means.

  Cedars
• 

  james_woods

  I repeat my earlier comment. It is really quite irrelevant for the British to criticize the American rule of law on gun ownership.