Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

ninethirty

macrumors 68000
Mar 1, 2006
1,540
1,556
Something else is that a majority of legal gun owners are black men and women who want to protect themselves.

"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." - Admendment II of the U.S. Constitution. The purpose of the 2nd Admendment was to make a milita to ensure the U.S.A. didn't become an oppressive government. (Hence "free State"). Despite what Joe Biden has to say on the topic you COULD buy a cannon. And the musket arguement is a poor arguement considering the United States government used muskets at the time and that when new technology was made (i.e revolvers, lever action rifles, etc.) the idea of people owning those was protected by the 2nd admendment.

Incorrect. The purpose of the 2nd amendment was to make sure that citizens were armed in the event that the British had other ideas for this newly created country. People love to pretend now that it's to stop an oppressive government, which is laughable, because if the government decided to act in an oppressive matter, with the support of the military, there is almost nothing that civilians with handguns and AR-15's could do about it. You'd be droned out of existence faster than you could even create a plan to fight back.

The musket argument is perfectly valid. It was representative of the type of weapon that was available at the time and so concerns about mass shootings unrelated to war didn't really exist. Things are different now, and when things change, you change also. We have failed to do that, again, because people prioritize their guns over the health and safety of others.
 

Apple Fan 2008

macrumors 65816
May 17, 2021
1,424
3,452
Florida, USA 🇺🇸
Incorrect. The purpose of the 2nd amendment was to make sure that citizens were armed in the event that the British had other ideas for this newly created country. People love to pretend now that it's to stop an oppressive government, which is laughable, because if the government decided to act in an oppressive matter, with the support of the military, there is almost nothing that civilians with handguns and AR-15's could do about it. You'd be droned out of existence faster than you could even create a plan to fight back.
They absoutly could, fireworks instead of rocket launchers, private jets with weapons instead of fighter jets, add auto sears to ar-15s. Plus the whole "ITS USELESS TO RESIST" idea is kinda the arguement a oppressive government would make.
 

Michael Scrip

macrumors 604
Mar 4, 2011
7,931
12,487
NC
right of the PEOPLE to keep and bear arms

Yes... that part is always cited:

- "the right of the people to keep and bear arms"

But they seem to ignore this part:

- "a well regulated militia"

Questions: Can one guy be a militia? And is he regulated?

Seems like any time the idea of gun regulation is mentioned... people freak out and say "muh 2nd amendment rights!"

Again... the third word is "regulated" and the fourth word is "militia"

I'd be fine if the text of the 2nd Amendment was just "the right of the people to keep and bear arms"

But there's that pesky first part about "a well regulated militia" that, in my opinion, informs the other part.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯
 
  • Like
Reactions: FriendlyMackle

ninethirty

macrumors 68000
Mar 1, 2006
1,540
1,556
Because they value their right to bear arms
Yes, we're aware. It's why I've said many times that they value it more than they value kids being alive, or having parents. This is a price that needs to be paid, apparently, to continue owning weapons, which couldn't even have been conceived of when the 2nd amendment was written.

So far, friend, you've failed to make any convincing arguments in favor of why gun control shouldn't be explored.
 
  • Like
Reactions: FriendlyMackle

ninethirty

macrumors 68000
Mar 1, 2006
1,540
1,556
They absoutly could, fireworks instead of rocket launchers, private jets with weapons instead of fighter jets, add auto sears to ar-15s. Plus the whole "ITS USELESS TO RESIST" idea is kinda the arguement a oppressive government would make.
That might be the argument an oppressive government would make, but they'd be correct. Nobody in this country stands a chance against the United States government and its military. You can dream about being Rambo or MacGyver all you want, but you'd be crushed in an instant.
 

ninethirty

macrumors 68000
Mar 1, 2006
1,540
1,556
You do realize that the phrase "well regulated" meant, in common parlance at the time, well equiped and well trained. It had nothing to do with rules or regulations
Can you provide a source for that? Also, are people walking in off the street and buying guns, "well trained?"
 
  • Like
Reactions: FriendlyMackle

Apple Fan 2008

macrumors 65816
May 17, 2021
1,424
3,452
Florida, USA 🇺🇸
Can you provide a source for that? Also, are people walking in off the street and buying guns, "well trained?"
You don't understand how gun laws work. In Florida, a very pro-gun state there is a 3-day waiting period between buying and walking out with a gun. For the purpose of a background check. The only ways to bypass this law is A. If you are trading in another gun that you own and B. If you have a concealed carry license, meaning you had to be in a class and trained how to use a firearm.
 

MmkLucario

macrumors 6502
Sep 16, 2022
279
229
Yes, we're aware. It's why I've said many times that they value it more than they value kids being alive, or having parents. This is a price that needs to be paid, apparently, to continue owning weapons, which couldn't even have been conceived of when the 2nd amendment was written.

So far, friend, you've failed to make any convincing arguments in favor of why gun control shouldn't be explored.
Some of the people that own guns are families. Some of the people that own guns are conservatives, who advocate for a nuclear family, with a mother and father.
 

bradl

macrumors 603
Jun 16, 2008
5,936
17,428
Some of the people that own guns are families. Some of the people that own guns are conservatives, who advocate for a nuclear family, with a mother and father.

Not a good argument. Those families with guns, conservatives, and those advocating for nuclear families have gone so far as threatening those who don't want that, to the point that those people under threat have had to purchase guns just to protect themselves from the very people you are describing.

That argument is very very weak.

BL.
 

MmkLucario

macrumors 6502
Sep 16, 2022
279
229
Also, how are you going to protect yourself if someone with a gun threatens you? Wait for the police, or somebody else with a gun? Also, how is gun control effective? Criminals don’t follow the laws to begin with.
 

MmkLucario

macrumors 6502
Sep 16, 2022
279
229
Not a good argument. Those families with guns, conservatives, and those advocating for nuclear families have gone so far as threatening those who don't want that, to the point that those people under threat have had to purchase guns just to protect themselves from the very people you are describing.

That argument is very very weak.

BL.
Can you provide me with some instances?
 

ninethirty

macrumors 68000
Mar 1, 2006
1,540
1,556
You don't understand how gun laws work. In Florida, a very pro-gun state there is a 3-day waiting period between buying and walking out with a gun. For the purpose of a background check. The only ways to bypass this law is A. If you are trading in another gun that you own and B. If you have a concealed carry license, meaning you had to be in a class and trained how to use a firearm.
Yes, I absolutely do.

All of those words, and no source, and no proving that everyone owning a gun must be well trained.
 

MmkLucario

macrumors 6502
Sep 16, 2022
279
229
Perhaps I missed it, but I failed to see where the law requires everyone who wants to purchase a gun to be well trained.
Here:
g) Desires a legal means to carry a concealed weapon or firearm for lawful self-defense;
(h) Demonstrates competence with a firearm by any one of the following:
1. Completion of any hunter education or hunter safety course approved by the Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission or a similar agency of another state;
2. Completion of any National Rifle Association firearms safety or training course;
3. Completion of any firearms safety or training course or class available to the general public offered by a law enforcement agency, junior college, college, or private or public institution or organization or firearms training school, using instructors certified by the National Rifle Association, Criminal Justice Standards and Training Commission, or the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services;
4. Completion of any law enforcement firearms safety or training course or class offered for security guards, investigators, special deputies, or any division or subdivision of a law enforcement agency or security enforcement;
5. Presents evidence of equivalent experience with a firearm through participation in organized shooting competition or military service;
6. Is licensed or has been licensed to carry a firearm in this state or a county or municipality of this state, unless such license has been revoked for cause; or
7. Completion of any firearms training or safety course or class conducted by a state-certified or National Rifle Association certified firearms instructor;
A photocopy of a certificate of completion of any of the courses or classes; an affidavit from the instructor, school, club, organization, or group that conducted or taught such course or class attesting to the completion of the course or class by the applicant; or a copy of any document that shows completion of the course or class or evidences participation in firearms competition shall constitute evidence of qualification under this paragraph. A person who conducts a course pursuant to subparagraph 2., subparagraph 3., or subparagraph 7., or who, as an instructor, attests to the completion of such courses, must maintain records certifying that he or she observed the student safely handle and discharge the firearm in his or her physical presence and that the discharge of the firearm included live fire using a firearm and ammunition as defined in s. 790.001;
 
  • Like
Reactions: PhoenixDown

MmkLucario

macrumors 6502
Sep 16, 2022
279
229

Apple Fan 2008

macrumors 65816
May 17, 2021
1,424
3,452
Florida, USA 🇺🇸
Yes... that part is always cited:

- "the right of the people to keep and bear arms"

But they seem to ignore this part:

- "a well regulated militia"

Questions: Can one guy be a militia? And is he regulated?

Seems like any time the idea of gun regulation is mentioned... people freak out and say "muh 2nd amendment rights!"

Again... the third word is "regulated" and the fourth word is "militia"

I'd be fine if the text of the 2nd Amendment was just "the right of the people to keep and bear arms"

But there's that pesky first part about "a well regulated militia" that, in my opinion, informs the other part.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯
"The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government." -Thomas Jefferson

I apolgize, I learned that quote was fake.

"If the representatives of the people betray their constituents, there is then no recourse left but in the exertion of that original right of self-defense which is paramount to all positive forms of government..." -Alexander Hamilton

This is a real quote and I'll list sources to prove it. https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Hamilton/01-04-02-0185
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: MmkLucario
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.