an eloquent op-ed from former peanut farmer jimmy carter on why we should re-institute the assault rifle ban:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/27/opinio...say what you want about the 2nd amendment, i think we can all agree that assault rifles don't need to be made accessible to everybody.
Amendment II
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.
banning assault rifles would infringe upon that. no?
Posted by orangeblobman:
Amendment II
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.
banning assault rifles would infringe upon that. no?
Well regulated meaning as long as you enjoy Nascar, you're eligible? Yeah that was red-neck labeling by me! Sorry, but NRA nuts really piss me off.
Posted by firefly:
Posted by orangeblobman:
Amendment II
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.
banning assault rifles would infringe upon that. no?
Well regulated meaning as long as you enjoy Nascar, you're eligible? Yeah that was red-neck labeling by me! Sorry, but NRA nuts really piss me off.
And since when, with the US DoD spending billions a year on a mational militia do they need fools all over the country carrying frickin AK's because it makes them feel safe.
[Edited by - firefly on 04-27-2009 11:44 AM]
firefly you're polarizing the argument and molding it for your own self-interest. lets try to look at the 2nd amendment objectively.
personally, i am not a gun owner nor am i a conservative christian nor am i an nra nut, or whatever else you want to label me. i consider myself a secular humanist and really, back to my first reply, isn't that (assault rifle ban) infringing on the 2nd amendment?
[Edited by - orangeblobman on 04-27-2009 1:07 PM]
isn't the point of the supreme court to interpret laws and the constitution and decide to what degree certain maxims are extended? did you even read what carter wrote orange blob?
"Presidents Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush, Bill Clinton and I all supported a ban on these formidable firearms, and one was finally passed in 1994.
When the 10-year ban was set to expire, many police organizations — including 1,100 police chiefs and sheriffs from around the nation — called on Congress and President George W. Bush to renew and strengthen it. But with a wink from the White House, the gun lobby prevailed and the ban expired."
in the illustrious career that was W running our country, he didn't renew the ban on assault rifles like clinton, HW bush, reagan, or carter did. now we have a bunch of psychos killing people with assault weapons. F that. ban them asap.
you're viewing it from too broad of a perspective. it's about much more than that. it's a deep, deep, deeeeeeeeeep issue, man. you have to go into biology, innate inclinations and such.
[Edited by - orangeblobman on 04-27-2009 1:14 PM]
what dude? i dont even really know what you're trying to say but assault weapons don't need to be on the streets.
Posted by BigSm00th:
what dude? i dont even really know what you're trying to say but assault weapons don't need to be on the streets.
LOL..pay him no mind.
But for the people who think like him, I'm amazed at how said individuals can hyperventilate over the legalization of marijuana, but will swear up and down that possessing assault rifles that spit out 75,00000000 rounds per second is an inherent American right.
What a perversion of the word, freedom.
they wouldn't be on the streets.
the guns that are on the STREETs are there illegally. what banning assault rifles would do is punish law abiding citizens who have legal guns. so because some thugs on the street go crazy with their illegal guns, innocent citizens need to suffer? get your stuff straight 'sebstar'.
Posted by orangeblobman:
personally, i am not a gun owner nor am i a conservative christian nor am i an nra nut, or whatever else you want to label me. i consider myself a secular humanist and really, back to my first reply, isn't that (assault rifle ban) infringing on the 2nd amendment?
[Edited by - orangeblobman on 04-27-2009 1:07 PM]
It's infringing upon the second amendment the same way not being able to make bomb threats/jokes in an airport infringes upon the first amendment.
Posted by MaTT4281:
Posted by orangeblobman:
personally, i am not a gun owner nor am i a conservative christian nor am i an nra nut, or whatever else you want to label me. i consider myself a secular humanist and really, back to my first reply, isn't that (assault rifle ban) infringing on the 2nd amendment?
[Edited by - orangeblobman on 04-27-2009 1:07 PM]
It's infringing upon the second amendment the same way not being able to make bomb threats/jokes in an airport infringes upon the first amendment.
Exactly. There should be a common sense Amendment. If yo have a gun, should be required to have a legitimate purpose for carrying it AT THAT TIME, otherwise you should be treated like every other neanderthal gun-toting gang-banger.
But the govt could never do that cuz the red states would secede. Great world we live in. Full of people who just refuse to help themselves and blame the govt for lawlessness on the streets.
i see what you're saying, but it seems a bit idealistic that violence would disappear without guns. you still have crazy people out there. a 'common sense' amendment sounds great
