They will not stop with the anti-gun propaganda.....

[goundra]

BigBro, WITHOUT doubt, will use mental health labels to lock up WHOMEVER they wish. Such laws are a slippery slope down which we'd better NOT get started!

 

[speed dawg]

So mass murderers don't have mental problems?

Of course they do. And they don't deserve our help. They need to be killed off.

The Batman shooter kid was calling his therapist before he shot up the theater. Under the old involuntary commitment laws, he would in all likelihood have been locked up before he could kill. The Newtown shooter kid creeped everybody out for a long time, too. Mental health care could have prevented those shootings, which would have also prevented the current mass hysteria to either ban or hoard guns.

Get out of here with this weak stuff. You can't commit somebody that creeps you out. You know better. None of these lollypops' "mental illness" was even talked about until after the killings.

 

[Bible_Belt]

There is actually an incredible study showing how certain pharmaceuticals have a very strong link with violence.

http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog...drugs-and-violence-review-fda-data-finds-link

Pharmaceuticals are supposed to be combined with therapy. But typically, insurance will pay for maybe two therapy sessions a month for six months. However, insurance will pay for the drugs forever. It's similar to our many problems in non-mental health care. It's more profitable to treat the symptoms than solve the problem.

 

[May_Day]

You people as well as these gun toting nuts are taking the Second Amemdment way too far. The "Right To Bear Arms" was adopted for protection (against The British, soliders, Indians, nomads and for hunting purposes) and for hunting. The Arms they used were muskets and pistols. It wasn't meant for some Hillbilly to have an arsenal and stock pile machine guns and assualt rifles. The Right To Bear Arms was for protection in the home, not for sport shooting and collecting high powered weapons. The gun manufacuters a hundred years later started making these weapons to make money. There is nothing in the constitution that says you should have a right to own any of those assault weapons. They never had them back then, so you don't need them now. The only reason they exist, is because of people making them. A shotgun or a hand gun will do a good job of what the Right to Bear arms is for, which is for protection. You don't need high powered assulat rifles to keep you safe in your home. Nobody is trying to take all guns, only ones that shouldn't be allowed in society, because we never had them before until recently.

 

[goundra]

the Constitution can be amended to do away with the 2nd amendment. But that does not change the right to defense. It WILL, however, launch the second American Civil War. That is my personal promise to you.

 

[Bible_Belt]

You people as well as these gun toting nuts are taking the Second Amemdment way too far. The "Right To Bear Arms" was adopted for protection (against The British, soliders, Indians, nomads and for hunting purposes) and for hunting. The Arms they used were muskets and pistols. It wasn't meant for some Hillbilly to have an arsenal and stock pile machine guns and assualt rifles. The Right To Bear Arms was for protection in the home, not for sport shooting and collecting high powered weapons. The gun manufacuters a hundred years later started making these weapons to make money. There is nothing in the constitution that says you should have a right to own any of those assault weapons. They never had them back then, so you don't need them now. The only reason they exist, is because of people making them. A shotgun or a hand gun will do a good job of what the Right to Bear arms is for, which is for protection. You don't need high powered assulat rifles to keep you safe in your home. Nobody is trying to take all guns, only ones that shouldn't be allowed in society, because we never had them before until recently.

In 1787, most written communication was through pamphlets and cheaply printed newspapers. The framers could never have envisioned a medium of speech so powerful that a message could instantly be read all over the world. Therefore, when they ratified the first Amendment, they were only thinking of the cheap newspapers of their time, and not the Internet.

Under that line of reasoning, the 1st Amendment would not apply to electronic communication. If you posted to the Internet that you were angry at your government, then they could come get you and lock you up. Or maybe they would make all text messages first have to be approved by a government censor before they go through. If you want to have free speech, you had better stick to cheap printing presses like the colonists had.

That's why the Constitution is considered a "living document." Otherwise, it would have died long ago. There are pros and cons to the living document idea (like Roe v Wade, imo). But it is the best system we have.

 

[goundra]

the right to bear arms most certainly was NOT about the right to defend your home. The militia man was REQUIRED TO ASSEMBLE at a given spot, PREPARED to march off and fight wherever he was deemed to be needed, by his leaders. It has NOTHING to do with his home, period. drafting men for Vietnam, had NOTHING to do with home defense, or the US being attacked, either. we will maintain our silenced, concealable, long range, armor piercing, rapidfire, 30 rd box detachable magazine fighting rifles, in the (more likely each day) event that the wannebe Hitlers try to enslave or kill us. Then we use our rifles to provide personal protection while we cause the economy to collapse, rendering either BiGbro or any invader unable to pay his thugs. they won't work for free, you know It will really only take about 60 really competent, fired up men to do this. so if one in 1 million gun owners has a pair, the antigunners will wish that they'd never been born., much less wish that they'd never stepped on our toes..

 

[BudaBing]

I haven't yet comes across a situation where I've needed a gun. I have enough martial arts training to deal with any aggressors...

Can martial arts stop a bullet? Didn't think so. Shows where you're coming from.

I took martial arts for years. Big deal.

Ever watch those UFC cage matches? Those guys have like 9-10 black belts for each contestant.

What happens when you watch those fights? They throw one or two punches and then they end up wrestling on the ground. Oh excuse me, they renamed it
"grappling" to give it more credibility. What a joke.

As for the gun debate, if you can guarentee me every single gun in the US would be eliminated (around 300 million last I heard) THEN I'll give up my gun.

 

[Bokanovsky]

It's important to keep things in perspective. Your chances of getting killed in a mass shooting are extraordinarily low compared to other ways in which you could die. According to the Center for Disease Control, approximately 2.5 million Americans die every year. Only a few dozen die as a result of mass shootings. For comparison, your chances of dying from catching a cold are about 1000 times higher than your chances of becoming a random victim of some deranged lunatic.

The less intelligent people behind the gun control movement (i.e. your typical "concerned" soccer mom) are driven by histeria and the more intelligent ones (i.e. politicians) are simply manipulating tragedies to push a certain political agenda. It has nothing to do with public safety.

 

[goundra]

martial arts can't even stop a pair of guys who have a fist sized stone in each hand, and know to throw them at the same time, from 6-8 ft away, one right after another. ONE of those 4 stones, or half bricks, or hunks of pavement, or pool balls, is going to fvck you up. punks dont need guns, just visciousness and perhaps, a buddy. I can carve you to pieces with nothing more than a 4 ft length of rebar, pipe, rod, or angle iron. So you still need a gun, even if no bad guys have them. besides, what about little women, the elderly, etc? they dont deserve an effective means of defense, right? fvck you.

 

[vaav]

Click here for the next wave logic. Use horrific tragedies to push the agenda.

Just another way for the government to somehow to make money.

did not stop me from getting ar15 bro

 

[Who Dares Win]

martial arts can't even stop a pair of guys who have a fist sized stone in each hand, and know to throw them at the same time, from 6-8 ft away, one right after another. ONE of those 4 stones, or half bricks, or hunks of pavement, or pool balls, is going to fvck you up. punks dont need guns, just visciousness and perhaps, a buddy. I can carve you to pieces with nothing more than a 4 ft length of rebar, pipe, rod, or angle iron. So you still need a gun, even if no bad guys have them. besides, what about little women, the elderly, etc? they dont deserve an effective means of defense, right? fvck you.

Repped, even twentee would be proud of you.

Seriously, that last line about women and elderly needing means for self defence ae much more convincing than stats since they push on emotions which is the same ground that the anti-gun crew use.

 

[twentee]

except my argument is based upon reality, theirs is not.

 

[LiveFreeX]

Well now that anyone can print off a gun and use it, I guess the debate is over. There will be no way in hell now to stop people from printing guns in 3D printers and distributing them. The world is about to become one scary fvcked up place to be.
I think a MAY_DAY made a good point, if you need a weapon then fine... use what your forefathers owned... a flint lock pistol and rifle... I would probably be ok if people were to carry those around. Just the same as if people carried bow and arrow on their backs...still requires skill to use effectively. Assault weapons and regular fire arms, any idiot can pick up and use. Women and Elderly can still buy night sticks, mace or stun guns.

 

[twentee]

bs, you gotta have MATERIAL, and plastic dojn't work for barrels, bolts, bullets, powder, primers, etc, etc. nobody is going to be just printing workable guns for decades yet.

 

[LiveFreeX]

This is probably not helping my argument any...

http://v.youku.com/v_show/id_XNDA4NDIwNDI0.html

Asian women and guns.

Enjoy the orgasm.