And the madness continues
- Thread starter Mr Badger
- Start date
as part of s "well regulated malitia" that is the wording.
where the regulated militia for most gun owners?
non existant
I didn't say they were stupid per se, but there seems to be a big gulf between "ready available for an adult to access" and "A toddler can find it and start shooting other toddlers"
There are already laws in the USA about what arms are available to citizens, the idea that suggesting changes to those rules/laws are naive or misplaced is a worthless sentiment from the gun lobby!
and no one has suggested that changes to those rules are naive or misplaced, again you seem to be confused/are conflating things here
stewski, so that we don't go around in circles for about 5 pages can you just provide some clarification:
are you talking about or proposing changing the 2nd amendment? This is what I'd refer to as naive and unrealistic any time soon in the US
are you talking about introducing federal or local state laws relating to the storage or carrying of firearms? - This isn't unrealistic and I've mentioned it myself (though you appear to have chosen to ignore it)
you're not going to get rid of guns any time soon in the US
As I just said many people have suggested legal changes that prohibit hand guns (as they already do prohibit a range of guns, rocket launchers and other weapons).
As for suggesting if they will or wont 'get rid' of guns, we haven't got rid of guns, pretty much nowhere has, we just don't allow absent minded mums to take hand guns to play groups.
In fact, if there is a need to amend the constitution in a country to prevent that from happening (or stop stoning, or allow black people the same rights in schools and on buses) it's neither naive nor misplaced to call for it, especially on a thread of this nature!
It is pretty naive to call for a change to the second amendment - it simply isn't going to happen any times soon, I've already linked to a relevant poll and alluded to why - a constitutional amendment isn't easy to pass in general and this particular constitutional amendment is one of the most prominent in the mindset of the US public.
Conflating this with stopping stoning or allowing black people on busses is pretty silly, neither of those have anything to do with the topic.
Conflating this with stopping stoning or allowing black people on busses is pretty silly, neither of those have anything to do with the topic.
From a utilitarian perspective, Why do you feel stoning in Saudi is worse; do you support that law on the basis that it wont likely change anyway?
As far as I know the second amendment and the USA doesn't allow citizens the right to bear, biological weapons, tactical nukes, RPGs, but are these not arms?
I've not given any opinion on stoning other than the point out that it isn't relevant to the thread
you're correct it generally doesn't, these are indeed arms
that doesn't change the reality that you're not going to either get rid of it or firearms in the US any time soon
Indeed you will give an opinion on people suggesting changing one barbaric tradition and not another.
It was irrelevant up until your post!
We haven't got rid of fire arms anywhere!
Athough I agree, they are clearly arms and the USA legal system ignores the second amendment which is wise and needs extending here from events like the subject of this thread!
no I've simply not talked about stoning because it isn't relevant to the thread
likewise if people think that a certain type of weapon ought to be allowed under the second amendment they can try and test laws banning or regulating them in court an example of this was already posted earlier re: the DC handgun ban re: both open and concealed carry
likewise if people think that a certain type of weapon ought to be allowed under the second amendment they can try and test laws banning or regulating them in court an example of this was already posted earlier re: the DC handgun ban re: both open and concealed carry
Nice of you guys staying on topic.
Problem here is not whether to ban guns or not, as we are not talking about an adult using guns. Its children, a toddler !!!, same with everything else parents, guardians need to make sure children do not get their hands on such stuff nevermind a toddler getting hold of it. Its no different then children getting hold of a kitchen knife and becomes Friday The 13th Jason or gets hold of prescribed medicine or drugs and plays the doctor.....
They just had to store their guns in a place where children cannot get to and it should have had the safety on, or keep ammo seperately..... Bad parenting or guardians nothing else....
Problem here is not whether to ban guns or not, as we are not talking about an adult using guns. Its children, a toddler !!!, same with everything else parents, guardians need to make sure children do not get their hands on such stuff nevermind a toddler getting hold of it. Its no different then children getting hold of a kitchen knife and becomes Friday The 13th Jason or gets hold of prescribed medicine or drugs and plays the doctor.....
They just had to store their guns in a place where children cannot get to and it should have had the safety on, or keep ammo seperately..... Bad parenting or guardians nothing else....
Why is the above statement not analogous to what you said, in your opinion?
I can't really understand why you'd refuse to comment on other equally entrenched barbaric out dated laws (and that is all they are) that cost citizen's their lives, whilst suggesting it's naive/misplaced for others to question equally barbaric, out dated laws in the USA.
Hmmm interesting way of looking at things, the legality of carrying a hand gun and someone (young or old) shooting someone else with said hand gun, are not related?
You should look up Bill Hicks he has a pretty interesting come back to that position
