Controversial Topics

[GatorLaid]

Something that isn't talked about enough is the age of our constitution. While the US is a relatively new nation (compared to Europe), our fundamental governing document is still over 200 years old. We've already made updates through amendments, and it may be time to consider an overall update. The 2nd amendment was written in a completely different era. We are no longer fighting off an oppressive government or invades with muskets. To suggest that the 'right to bear arms' in the 1700's and today are the same is absurd.

 

[CoreKeyblade]

Something that isn't talked about enough is the age of our constitution. While the US is a relatively new nation (compared to Europe), our fundamental governing document is still over 200 years old. We've already made updates through amendments, and it may be time to consider an overall update. The 2nd amendment was written in a completely different era. We are no longer fighting off an oppressive government or invades with muskets. To suggest that the 'right to bear arms' in the 1700's and today are the same is absurd.

Not being really from America, I feel I can provide no opinion on something like the constitutions as it has had no direct effect on my life like it does for American citizens. Nor do I feel the urge (or ignorance) to debate something I don't truly understand.

 

[blaze1514]

The difference is morality my freind, if a person kills for selfish reasons such as money or personal gain, I'd consider them "a bad guy" as would most people, self defence however is a different matter, If a person is acting in self defence, then generally, there desire is not to kill, just to ward the attacker from doing it again (such as a confrontation with a school bully) the death of the offender is normally due to there own ignorance.
MODERN soldiers are a good example of, they use guns everyday, however they never fire unless ether fired upon, or if a target is confirmed threat to themselves then others. They always try to take alive if nessasary (hell they where willing to take bin-laden alive!) they only kill if given no other option...

Yes except one point, they were ordered to kill Bin-Laden. No Exceptions

Something that isn't talked about enough is the age of our constitution. While the US is a relatively new nation (compared to Europe), our fundamental governing document is still over 200 years old. We've already made updates through amendments, and it may be time to consider an overall update. The 2nd amendment was written in a completely different era. We are no longer fighting off an oppressive government or invades with muskets. To suggest that the 'right to bear arms' in the 1700's and today are the same is absurd.

The fact is that the framers of the constitution were framing a law that could withstand the test of time. When they put the original ten amendments (the Bill of Rights) in the Constitution they made the laws simple enough that no matter what circumstances (population, tech advancement, world affairs, US affairs) they are simple enough to still be able to be followed without a problem. That includes the right to bare arms and the right form ties with a militia organization.

 

[GatorLaid]

Yes except one point, they were ordered to kill Bin-Laden. No Exceptions



The fact is that the framers of the constitution were framing a law that could withstand the test of time. When they put the original ten amendments (the Bill of Rights) in the Constitution they made the laws simple enough that no matter what circumstances (population, tech advancement, world affairs, US affairs) they are simple enough to still be able to be followed without a problem. That includes the right to bare arms and the right form ties with a militia organization.

So they had that kind of foresight but they just forgot about the whole slavery/gender equality thing? Let's not forget Amendments 4 and 6 which are pretty much ignored thanks to the Patriot Act and drone strikes of today.

 

[CoreKeyblade]

Yes except one point, they were ordered to kill Bin-Laden. No Exceptions

Considering I've taken the time to read up on the operation surrounding his death, They WERE willing to take him alive,

 

[CO BOARDERS]

Well if you read it it must be true. Lololol

 

[CoreKeyblade]

Oh now that's just harsh Boarders I'm not an idiot I can pick out fact and fiction on the Internet, references hell also....

 

[blaze1514]

So they had that kind of foresight but they just forgot about the whole slavery/gender equality thing? Let's not forget Amendments 4 and 6 which are pretty much ignored thanks to the Patriot Act and drone strikes of today.

Yes they ignored it (when it came to forming the country). Many of them wrote journals about the contradiction and how if they could give up slaves they would... they said they were just too dependent on them then. Slaves are what made our country possible (not saying its right) without slaves our country never would have grown so fast in only 3-5 generations.

 

[CO BOARDERS]

Oh now that's just harsh Boarders I'm not an idiot I can pick out fact and fiction on the Internet, references hell also....

LOL - I know, I was posting with my sense of sarcasm in the middle of the night of my 5th shot of whiskey. lolol

 

[Tedium]

That got me thinking. Why did slaves help? Because then we had loads of man power to get things done. But slaves are bad. But manpower is good. And growth is good. And without that bad thing, things wouldn't be so good, right? So we need manpower, without it coming from slaves. Hm... how about... we enslave ourselves? Not to be unfair about it, but just to stop being so lazy. We waste hours at home doing recreation, when we could be building and researching. We eat and eat and eat, so we've certainly got the energy for it! Just eat candy all day, but work your ass-off for 18 hours straight. Then you won't gain weight! We even get a bonus: unlimited candy! Doesn't that sound fun, children?

 

[CO BOARDERS]

LOL Tedium - Very random. Only reason we had slaves was to maximize profits for landowners and developers. Money money money.

Now, you have the "owners"/power people, and the slaves (in all their various forms). There is also a third party, which is everyone else who does not fully fit into either of the previous groups, but unknowning supports/feeds one or the other, or both.

The trick, is to take that money from realized profits and use it to market and manipulate the third "benevolent" party into supporting causes that will continue to maximize said profits. etc etc etc.

 

[Tedium]

The trick, is to take that money from realized profits and use it to market and manipulate the third "benevolent" party into supporting causes that will continue to maximize said profits. etc etc etc. Slavery is fine, as long as we can tax you for it.

 

[CO BOARDERS]

Haha exactly.

 

[rustewheel]

On the gun issue I don't think taking away guns will stop mass shootings. Hell I could blow up a school with some dynamite, should we ban that too? No. If weirdos want to kill people then they will do it look at 911.

 

[TrickierHades]

Gun control in my opinion is generally a good thing. I don't wan't every single person's gun taken away but why the fuck do you need an automatic rifle with 30 round clip!!?!? You have a double barrel shotgun, Handgun, hunting rifle? That's cool. It is just common sense people! And if you actually take a look at all ready existing gun laws you can see how easy it is to get passed rules and such. We need better defined laws and better enforcement of them.

 

[CoreKeyblade]

I can appreciate your new guys but,, it helps to stick to the argument were discussing now, to stop people repeating there previously made points on the said topic, just read the back catalogue, a few of those points have been explained/discussed.

 

[TrickierHades]

I can appreciate your new guys but,, it helps to stick to the argument were discussing now, to stop people repeating there previously made points on the said topic, just read the back catalogue, a few of those points have been explained/discussed.

I do not go on this site as much as I would like to so while I am on I just wanted to say my opinion since the reason I made this thread is so I could get my opinion out there and possibly discuss it while it's hot. So while I understand your concern and advice please remember that I have 0 fucks to give. Thank you. Btw if the sentence structure makes no sense it is late here and I am tired as fuck so excuse my grammar.

 

[CO BOARDERS]

Yeah I have no problem opne way or the other. Discuss what you will.

How controversal! lol

 

[PandaMan]

Some of the arguments in this thread.... Dear God. So uninformed. No offense.

The lack of specific mention of types of firearms in the Constitution was done on purpose. It is similar to the idea of freedom of speech. The founding fathers had no idea that something like the internet would even be possible.

The idea of arming ourselves against an oppressive government is not to try to beat said government one on one, but to cause enough damage to the government that they have to reform their policies or give up due to taking too much damage. And for all of those who say that the drones, planes, bombs, tanks, etc. will be used, you are so unrealistic. Hearts and minds people. An oppressive government fighting its OWN people has no chance of keeping its citizens on its side if it just dessimates everyone it fights. Look at Afghanistan. Those people are armed with better arms than the average US citizen (automatic firearms and other assorted firearms compared to the US semi-auto and bolt action) and they accomplished their goal. To push their oppressor out of their country to leave them be by making it too costly.

In regards to crime and mass shootings, so called assault weapons are hardly used in crime. In the last 3 or 4 mass shootings, they have been used, but that hardly accounts for the mass shootings in the past and the daily murders across the nation.

Once the Second Amendment goes, what is next?

My argument doesn't even begin to touch the idea that imposing strict gun control like the countries listed earlier for their crime rates or something like that, is neigh impossible in the US due to the abundance of firearms and the passion for which some people have.


REAL SOLUTIONS to mass shootings are increasing mental health care and screening for ALL people (knives and bombs are just as easily used as firearms) as well as an agreement with the media to not glorify the shooter for what he has done. These evil men should not go down in history and be infamous for a month or two across the country. That is just not right.

 

[TrickierHades]

Some of the arguments in this thread.... Dear God. So uninformed. No offense.

The lack of specific mention of types of firearms in the Constitution was done on purpose. It is similar to the idea of freedom of speech. The founding fathers had no idea that something like the internet would even be possible.

The idea of arming ourselves against an oppressive government is not to try to beat said government one on one, but to cause enough damage to the government that they have to reform their policies or give up due to taking too much damage. And for all of those who say that the drones, planes, bombs, tanks, etc. will be used, you are so unrealistic. Hearts and minds people. An oppressive government fighting its OWN people has no chance of keeping its citizens on its side if it just dessimates everyone it fights. Look at Afghanistan. Those people are armed with better arms than the average US citizen (automatic firearms and other assorted firearms compared to the US semi-auto and bolt action) and they accomplished their goal. To push their oppressor out of their country to leave them be by making it too costly.

In regards to crime and mass shootings, so called assault weapons are hardly used in crime. In the last 3 or 4 mass shootings, they have been used, but that hardly accounts for the mass shootings in the past and the daily murders across the nation.

Once the Second Amendment goes, what is next?

My argument doesn't even begin to touch the idea that imposing strict gun control like the countries listed earlier for their crime rates or something like that, is neigh impossible in the US due to the abundance of firearms and the passion for which some people have.


REAL SOLUTIONS to mass shootings are increasing mental health care and screening for ALL people (knives and bombs are just as easily used as firearms) as well as an agreement with the media to not glorify the shooter for what he has done. These evil men should not go down in history and be infamous for a month or two across the country. That is just not right.

Yeah totally. I mean if that's the logic than sure. Cause you know like because there has been so few nukes dropped we don't really need to worry controlling them or who gets them any more. And identifing who are the crazies will work because you could totally predict human nature, It's not like humans are naturally violent or anything. And don't forget how is easy it is to kill people with knifes. They are just as dangerous as guns, cause one knife can kill 20 people in an instance, just like a gun. And protecting our selves from an opressive goverment will work, since we have automatic weapons and they have tanks and smart bombs. And what about the second amendment!? Our laws are not supposed to be adaptable so we can do the logical thing for that time, that's ridiculous.