125
Dispelling Right Wing Gun-Knife myth : Swingers Discussion 2149431071
Busy Swingers Forum - everything you always wanted to know about swingers.
SwingLifeStyle Swingers Personal Ads. | SwingLifeStyle Swingers Clubs

Busy Swingers Forum

Everything you always wanted to know about swingers.

Create A Free Account

HELP
FORUMSGeneral DiscussionsPoliticsDispelling Right Wing Gun-Knife myth
TOPIC: Dispelling Right Wing Gun-Knife myth
GoTo Page: Less ... 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 ... More 
Start   71 to 80 of 211   End
User Details are only visible to members.
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.

I hope you do see the part that says people, NOT militia. The people are the militia, not the standing army, the right of the people to keep and bear arms , shall not be infringed. What part of NOT BE INFRINGED do you not understand.

Most liberals are idiots, the rest are morons.

Sanford NC
 
 
Username hidden
(19231 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
Robert if the NG is the militia, no president could send them overseas. But in fact they are part of the standing army that is why it has been allowed. You really have no concept of the constitution and laws.

Sanford NC
 
 
Username hidden
(19231 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
Looking:

Reread the second amendment. It doesn't say any old militia, it says a regulated militia.

As the national guard is the state militia, it is entirely plosable that at some point one would be required to join the national guard in order to retain their weapons.

You cannot chery pick the parts of the constitution which you like and forgo the parts you do not.

This is the problem with bible thumpers... They cherry pick the parts they like, and ignore the rest using their interpolations to back them.

Me? When my prey goes to ground, I tend to make like sun sue and leave no ground to go to. So yeah, hid behind your cherry picked 2A and I will begin to support simply doing away with it entirely or using its most strickly interpreted meaning requiring all those wanting to be armed to maintain good standing in the state militia. (state national guard)

Hazle Township PA
 
 
Username hidden
(6871 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
Bobby look up the definition of Militia please.....

Burlingham NY
 
 
Username hidden
(9618 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
Well on face value that is a question out of context. But I will answer it with a question myself. Just like the home owner in who filled the space of her broken door with lead, aimed right at the person who had just broken open her door; what would have happened if someone who on hearing that school door being broken open, would have filled the open space with lead? Aimed right at the person who was stepping through the door.

Tulare CA
 
 
Username hidden
(1880 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
"... civilians seldom hit innocent bystanders. "

Do tell. Then who are these mass killers, if not civilians?

Flat Rock NC
 
 
Username hidden
(2984 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
I did a double check of the second ULR to make sure I had it right. Sorry but WAFB has taken the video down.

Tulare CA
 
 
Username hidden
(1880 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
2 of 2) True, there are exceptions – some of my cop friends practice regularly, including participating in “combat” shooting competition. As a result, they will likely be more effective than most of their fellow officers in an actual shooting confrontation. But the problem is that they are exceptions. Compare that to civilian handgun permit holders, many of whom practice monthly, if not weekly, and firing hundreds of rounds at each session. I am a professional firearm instructor, and I can attest to the fact that I often run into my students at the range, and they are not alone. As a result, civilians seldom hit innocent bystanders. But even more disturbing is research by the FBI that has shown that violent criminals (those most likely to get into a shootout with police) practice as much at TEN TIMES MORE OFTEN THAN COPS: http //www forcescience org/fsinews/2006/12/new-findings-from-fbi-about-cop-attackers-their-weapons/ Not surprisingly, the same study shows that the criminals are also better shots than the cops – their hit rates, in actual shoot-outs, average an astonishing 70% – they hit cops far more often than the cops are able to hit them. There are many reasons for the lack of training, from misplaced priorities to tightening budgets. But the simple fact is that the average civilian who has a permit to carry a handgun is far less likely to be a threat to innocent bystanders than the average police officer.

Tulare CA
 
 
Username hidden
(1880 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
1 of 2) Who Are the Greater Threats to Public Safety – Police or Carry Permit Holders? WRITTEN BY JOHN CAILEON JANUARY 3, 2013 It’s the New Year, and with Obama and Democrats already clamoring for more gun control, we often hear that “civilians aren’t as well trained as police.” This claim completely ignores a reality that has long been known to firearm trainers – most cops are only marginally competent with a handgun. As a result, they often place the public at great risk when they engage in shootouts with suspects. A perfect example was the incident last September in New York, when a disgruntled employee opened fire on his ex-boss right in front of the Empire State Building. A short time later two NYPD officers caught up with him, and fired multiple shots, killing the offender. The video below captured the moment: http //www youtube com/watch?v=oSV-iSnk6YM What is not immediately clear in the video is that the officers, shooting at a distance of less than ten feet, also hit nine bystanders. I’ll be the first to come to the defense of the officers –the stress of a shoot-out is simply indescribable to those who have never experienced it. But look at another incident that occurred only days later, in Baton Rouge, where a civilian came upon a scene in which a police officer was on the ground being beaten by an assailant: http //www wafb com/Global/story asp? S=4527526 Police say Perry Stevens was walking outside of the Auto Zone on Greenwell Springs Road when he heard [Officer] Harrison yelling for help. According to Col. Greg Phares, “[Mr. Stevens] orders Mr. Temple to stop and get off the officer. The verbal commands are ignored and Mr. Stevens fires four shots, all of which struck Mr. Temple.” With [suspect] Temple still struggling with the officer, Perry continued to advance toward the scuffle. “He again orders Mr. Temple to stop what he was doing and get off the officer. Those commands are ignored and he fires a fifth shot and that hits his head. The incident is over with, and as you know, Mr. Temple is dead.” Now, while these incidents are anecdotes, they are not unusual, and illustrate a disturbing reality. Records from major police departments like New York and Chicago clearly show that the “hit rates” (percentage of shots fired by cops that actually hit suspects) are nothing short of abysmal. Cops typically hit offenders less than 20% of the time, often at distances of 10 feet or less! But aren’t police officers “highly trained” experts in the use of firearms? The short answer is, NO. Contrary to the fantasy world of television, where law enforcement characters spend endless hours at the gun range honing their skills, in reality most police officers go to a shooting range only once or twice a year! And when they get there, they seldom shoot more than one box of ammo.

Tulare CA
 
 
Username hidden
(1880 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
outdoor:

If the owner of the weapon was held liable for the lost weapon... We would have more owners keeping their weapons secured. There IS no excuse for a lost weapon as a lost weapon is an unsecured weapon.

Stolen weapons are a bit different...

I say that in the event that a weapons safe wasn't taken during the theft (the weapon/s in question being in the safe) or the safe cracked/cut/other and a police investigation begun.

The original owner ought to be held liable for any crime committed with the weapon for up to 30 days after the report of it being stolen.

Why? To encourage use of weapon safes. To encourage the timely reporting of stolen weapons and to discourage irresponsible would be weapon owners from buying said weapons.

A fire are isn't a knife, it isn't a sword and it isn't a hammer... Want the weapon? You will accept the responsibility that comes with such ownership.

Furthermore, I say that all of the rules in safe operation of a weapon that the US military are restricted by, ought to be placed upon civilian gun owners as well. (The most restrictive ROE's, the most restrictive safety rules, ect.)

Thus no more photos of mothers with their babies sucking on the barrel of the weapon.

No more John wayen or other fantasy actor reenactments with real weapons.

No more irresponsibility.

Hazle Township PA
 
 
Username hidden
(6871 posts)
GoTo Page: Less ... 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 ... More 
Start   71 to 80 of 211   End
TOPIC: Dispelling Right Wing Gun-Knife myth