Has The U.S Government Overstepped its Boundries on Anti-Gun

[Occupied Deutschland]

we should put a ban on the weapon that causes the most gun crime Handguns then we can ban fully automatic rifles

And here, in one sentence, is a major problem in the debate.

[Grave_n_idle]

I said league because you did.

That seems unlikely. I just did a search of posts, and the first time I said 'league' in this thread was a reference to Calaveras' post, and the other times I said it I was either responding to him using it or you using it.

That revision is presumably served by SCOTUS repeatedly interpreting and applying the Constitution.

Clearly not. The fact that these arguments keep coming up rather suggests that the extant version of the Second Amendment really doesn't serve the purpose any more - far better to amend it or replace it, so that the Constitution actually has a bulletproof Amendment that actually explains what it means, rather than arguing about what might have been intended.

[Dyakovo]

In fairness, show me some numbers.

It's not exactly an unknown issue.
NBC, Tucson Citizen, they've got reports on it. Fox also had a section on it but, well, it's Fox.

You do realize that illegal immigrants and drug runners are not the same thing as an invasion, yes?

[Imperializt Russia]

we should put a ban on the weapon that causes the most gun crime Handguns then we can ban fully automatic rifles

Handguns provide the most legitimate self-defence weapon.
Fully automatic rifles are already heavily restricted and have been reportedly used in two homicides since the 1934 NFA, one of which not even being a rifle (and was also being used by an on-duty cop).

I said league because you did.

That seems unlikely. I just did a search of posts, and the first time I said 'league' in this thread was a reference to Calaveras' post, and the other times I said it I was either responding to him using it or you using it.

The post which I originally quoted to make that "league" statement featured you using the term "league".
I didn't say you brought it up, but you used it.

And an assault rifle is in a totally different league to a pistol.

That's not an argument.

It's in the exact same league. It's a handheld, self-loading firearm.

Well, I guess they are in different leagues, since nine out of ten people prefer to kill someone with a handgun than a rifle.

[Len Hyet]

It's not exactly an unknown issue.
NBC, Tucson Citizen, they've got reports on it. Fox also had a section on it but, well, it's Fox.

You do realize that illegal immigrants and drug runners are not the same thing as an invasion, yes?

I don't recall ever saying invasion.

[Geilinor]

I said league because you did.

That seems unlikely. I just did a search of posts, and the first time I said 'league' in this thread was a reference to Calaveras' post, and the other times I said it I was either responding to him using it or you using it.

That revision is presumably served by SCOTUS repeatedly interpreting and applying the Constitution.

Clearly not. The fact that these arguments keep coming up rather suggests that the extant version of the Second Amendment really doesn't serve the purpose any more - far better to amend it or replace it, so that the Constitution actually has a bulletproof Amendment that actually explains what it means, rather than arguing about what might have been intended.

I agree. I think it's just best to rewrite the amendment now to clearly allow for moderate gun legislation and remove the militia part.

[Qahadim]

we should put a ban on the weapon that causes the most gun crime Handguns then we can ban fully automatic rifles

And here, in one sentence, is a major problem in the debate.

Just A major problem?

[Central Kadigan]

How can you possibly complain about over-strict gun laws when teenagers are executing classrooms full of children while armed with thousands of rounds of ammunition and weapons capable of discharging hundreds of rounds per minute?

I have no problem with handguns for self-defense, single-action rifles for hunting, or shotguns for sport-shooting - assuming that the owner has submitted to a comprehensive background check, passed a basic safety class, demonstrated practical proficiency, and that the weapon itself is registered, licensed, inspected for safety, and fully insured for liability (you know, just like what we require for cars). But if you "need" an AR-15 to feel like a man, then no amount of weaponry is going to be enough for you to compensate for your own insecurities.

There comes a time when society’s right to demand appropriate and reasonable public health policies to stop gun violence has to trump an individual’s paranoid fantasies about fighting a rebellion against a theoretical future fascist government takeover.

[Death Metal]

"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." So I say they have way over stepped their boundaries.

There's a difference between "keeping arms" and "keeping any kind of arms". So, basically, no.

Also, our current government is the most Pro-Gun since WWII.

[Qahadim]

How can you possibly complain about over-strict gun laws when teenagers are executing classrooms full of children while armed with thousands of rounds of ammunition and weapons capable of discharging hundreds of rounds per minute?

I have no problem with handguns for self-defense, single-action rifles for hunting, or shotguns for sport-shooting - assuming that the owner has submitted to a comprehensive background check, passed a basic safety class, demonstrated practical proficiency, and that the weapon itself is registered, licensed, inspected for safety, and fully insured for liability (you know, just like what we require for cars). But if you "need" an AR-15 to feel like a man, then no amount of weaponry is going to be enough for you to compensate for your own insecurities.

There comes a time when society’s right to demand appropriate and reasonable public health policies to stop gun violence has to trump an individual’s paranoid fantasies about fighting a rebellion against a theoretical future fascist government takeover.

In order to be an effective minute man in this day and age I need a weapon that is accurate, fires quickly, reloads simply, and is light weight and highly mobile. Having the capability Yo chamber military grade ammunition without conversion is also a necessity. A semi-automatic AR-15 fits all of that criteria perfectly. Given the previous SCOTUS rulings on firearm regulation the burden of proof is on you to show that what you want to ban isn't in common use and isn'tbeneficial to the effectiveness of the civilian militia.

[Farnhamia]

How can you possibly complain about over-strict gun laws when teenagers are executing classrooms full of children while armed with thousands of rounds of ammunition and weapons capable of discharging hundreds of rounds per minute?

I have no problem with handguns for self-defense, single-action rifles for hunting, or shotguns for sport-shooting - assuming that the owner has submitted to a comprehensive background check, passed a basic safety class, demonstrated practical proficiency, and that the weapon itself is registered, licensed, inspected for safety, and fully insured for liability (you know, just like what we require for cars). But if you "need" an AR-15 to feel like a man, then no amount of weaponry is going to be enough for you to compensate for your own insecurities.

There comes a time when society’s right to demand appropriate and reasonable public health policies to stop gun violence has to trump an individual’s paranoid fantasies about fighting a rebellion against a theoretical future fascist government takeover.

In order to be an effective minute man in this day and age I need a weapon that is accurate, fires quickly, reloads simply, and is light weight and highly mobile. Having the capability Yo chamber military grade ammunition without conversion is also a necessity. A semi-automatic AR-15 fits all of that criteria perfectly. Given the previous SCOTUS rulings on firearm regulation the burden of proof is on you to show that what you want to ban isn't in common use and isn'tbeneficial to the effectiveness of the civilian militia.

Which civilian militia is that, and when was the last time it was called out in the US?

[Central Kadigan]

How can you possibly complain about over-strict gun laws when teenagers are executing classrooms full of children while armed with thousands of rounds of ammunition and weapons capable of discharging hundreds of rounds per minute?

I have no problem with handguns for self-defense, single-action rifles for hunting, or shotguns for sport-shooting - assuming that the owner has submitted to a comprehensive background check, passed a basic safety class, demonstrated practical proficiency, and that the weapon itself is registered, licensed, inspected for safety, and fully insured for liability (you know, just like what we require for cars). But if you "need" an AR-15 to feel like a man, then no amount of weaponry is going to be enough for you to compensate for your own insecurities.

There comes a time when society’s right to demand appropriate and reasonable public health policies to stop gun violence has to trump an individual’s paranoid fantasies about fighting a rebellion against a theoretical future fascist government takeover.

In order to be an effective minute man in this day and age I need a weapon that is accurate, fires quickly, reloads simply, and is light weight and highly mobile. Having the capability Yo chamber military grade ammunition without conversion is also a necessity. A semi-automatic AR-15 fits all of that criteria perfectly. Given the previous SCOTUS rulings on firearm regulation the burden of proof is on you to show that what you want to ban isn't in common use and isn'tbeneficial to the effectiveness of the civilian militia.

Exactly which well-regulated and organized civilian militia are you a member that required you to need such a battlefield weapon?

[Geilinor]

How can you possibly complain about over-strict gun laws when teenagers are executing classrooms full of children while armed with thousands of rounds of ammunition and weapons capable of discharging hundreds of rounds per minute?

I have no problem with handguns for self-defense, single-action rifles for hunting, or shotguns for sport-shooting - assuming that the owner has submitted to a comprehensive background check, passed a basic safety class, demonstrated practical proficiency, and that the weapon itself is registered, licensed, inspected for safety, and fully insured for liability (you know, just like what we require for cars). But if you "need" an AR-15 to feel like a man, then no amount of weaponry is going to be enough for you to compensate for your own insecurities.

There comes a time when society’s right to demand appropriate and reasonable public health policies to stop gun violence has to trump an individual’s paranoid fantasies about fighting a rebellion against a theoretical future fascist government takeover.

This is almost exactly my view on guns as well. Fears of dictatorship setting in are really theoretical fantasies in a developed and democratic country. What precedent is there for a takeover to happen in the US or a comparable country?

[Enadail]

How can you possibly complain about over-strict gun laws when teenagers are executing classrooms full of children while armed with thousands of rounds of ammunition and weapons capable of discharging hundreds of rounds per minute?

I have no problem with handguns for self-defense, single-action rifles for hunting, or shotguns for sport-shooting - assuming that the owner has submitted to a comprehensive background check, passed a basic safety class, demonstrated practical proficiency, and that the weapon itself is registered, licensed, inspected for safety, and fully insured for liability (you know, just like what we require for cars). But if you "need" an AR-15 to feel like a man, then no amount of weaponry is going to be enough for you to compensate for your own insecurities.

There comes a time when society’s right to demand appropriate and reasonable public health policies to stop gun violence has to trump an individual’s paranoid fantasies about fighting a rebellion against a theoretical future fascist government takeover.

This is almost exactly my view on guns as well.

Ditto.

[Death Metal]

In order to be an effective minute man in this day and age I need a weapon that is accurate, fires quickly, reloads simply, and is light weight and highly mobile.

Tell you what.

If a secret alliance of Russians and Cubans slip into the country by parachuting out of airplanes and starts terrorizing the US, THEN you can have a full-auto weapon.

If the Borg attack, then you can have any kind of weapon you want.

Until then, quite frankly, we don't really need minutemen, and in the highly unlikely event that you are needed for a militia, the state will happily provide you with a M16A2 or better yet an M4.

[Qahadim]

In order to be an effective minute man in this day and age I need a weapon that is accurate, fires quickly, reloads simply, and is light weight and highly mobile. Having the capability Yo chamber military grade ammunition without conversion is also a necessity. A semi-automatic AR-15 fits all of that criteria perfectly. Given the previous SCOTUS rulings on firearm regulation the burden of proof is on you to show that what you want to ban isn't in common use and tbeneficial to the effectiveness of the civilian militia.

Which civilian militia is that, and when was the last time it was called out in the US?

Both the organized and unorganized militia which have been codifies in U.S. Law since our country's inception. When the last time they were called is irrelevant to my point. Three SCOTUS either has to 180 their previous rulings or we have to amend the constitution to change the concept of what is classified as a legal firearm.

[Geilinor]

In order to be an effective minute man in this day and age I need a weapon that is accurate, fires quickly, reloads simply, and is light weight and highly mobile.

Tell you what.

If a secret alliance of Russians and Cubans slip into the country by parachuting out of airplanes and starts terrorizing the US, THEN you can have a full-auto weapon.

If the Borg attack, then you can have any kind of weapon you want.

Until then, quite frankly, we don't really need minutemen, and in the highly unlikely event that you are needed for a militia, the state will happily provide you with a M16A2 or better yet an M4.

He probably wouldn't need a full-auto weapon even if Russians, Cubans, or the Borg attacked. The government could just call in the National Guard.

[Qahadim]

In order to be an effective minute man in this day and age I need a weapon that is accurate, fires quickly, reloads simply, and is light weight and highly mobile. Having the capability Yo chamber military grade ammunition without conversion is also a necessity. A semi-automatic AR-15 fits all of that criteria perfectly. Given the previous SCOTUS rulings on firearm regulation the burden of proof is on you to show that what you want to ban isn't in common use and isn'tbeneficial to the effectiveness of the civilian militia.

Exactly which well-regulated and organized civilian militia are you a member that required you to need such a battlefield weapon?

The Iowa militia. And again the burden of proof is on you to show they aren't beneficial and they are not in common use.

[Len Hyet]

In order to be an effective minute man in this day and age I need a weapon that is accurate, fires quickly, reloads simply, and is light weight and highly mobile. Having the capability Yo chamber military grade ammunition without conversion is also a necessity. A semi-automatic AR-15 fits all of that criteria perfectly. Given the previous SCOTUS rulings on firearm regulation the burden of proof is on you to show that what you want to ban isn't in common use and isn'tbeneficial to the effectiveness of the civilian militia.

Which civilian militia is that, and when was the last time it was called out in the US?

Don't bother. We've already established that it has never been called out and that he's a part of the Unorganized Militia.

[Death Metal]

Exactly which well-regulated and organized civilian militia are you a member that required you to need such a battlefield weapon?

The Iowa militia.

Not a real militia. Militias are state-sponsored.

[Occupied Deutschland]

In order to be an effective minute man in this day and age I need a weapon that is accurate, fires quickly, reloads simply, and is light weight and highly mobile. Having the capability Yo chamber military grade ammunition without conversion is also a necessity. A semi-automatic AR-15 fits all of that criteria perfectly. Given the previous SCOTUS rulings on firearm regulation the burden of proof is on you to show that what you want to ban isn't in common use and isn'tbeneficial to the effectiveness of the civilian militia.

Which civilian militia is that, and when was the last time it was called out in the US?

The last time it was called out is irrelevant.
And the civilian militia is the populace itself (disregarding older sexist definitions of such that limit it to men and age restrictions that aren't as relevant as they were when the code was passed).

[Occupied Deutschland]

The Iowa militia.

Not a real militia. Militias are state-sponsored.

Wholly incorrect.

[Genivaria]

The Iowa militia.

Not a real militia. Militias are state-sponsored.

See it's these gun toting Alex Jones listeners that I find concerning.

[Qahadim]

The Iowa militia.

Not a real militia. Militias are state-sponsored.

Incorrect. Private militias are legal, and regulated in all fifty states except Wyoming. And I am talking about the "state-sponsored" militia of Iowa. The fact that i'm a member of the unorganized one is irrelevant, given the law.

[Qahadim]

Not a real militia. Militias are state-sponsored.

See it's these gun toting Alex Jones listeners that I find concerning.

I might identify as libertarian, but Alex Jones is a quack. Take your assumption and stick it. Thank you.