- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Guns &Ammo editorial supports gun control
Posted on 11/7/13 at 10:39 am to Lpmann3
Posted on 11/7/13 at 10:39 am to Lpmann3
quote:
He doesn't call for any level of gun control, he simply says its not an infringement on the second amendment to have any kind of regulation. He never says what he thinks is an appropriate level of control other than to say that a 16 hour class is not inappropriate.
Webster's dictionary defines an infringement as, "an encroachment or trespass on a right or privilege." Regulations on the second amendment are infringements, period. You acknowledge so much when you attempt to justify "degree[s] to which guns should be regulated." But there are really good reasons to infringe right?
quote:
I want well trained and responsible people to be able to carry in public open or concealed WITH A PERMIT.
Interesting to know that you believe your personal feelings on the matter should dictate the fundamental rights of other citizens of this nation. Your logic puts you in good standing with many dictators, monarchs, and politicians that all know what is better for simple peasants.
3
Posted on 11/7/13 at 10:47 am to 10MTNTiger
quote:
Interesting to know that you believe your personal feelings on the matter should dictate the fundamental rights of other citizens of this nation. Your logic puts you in good standing with many dictators, monarchs, and politicians that all know what is better for simple peasants.
Posted on 11/7/13 at 11:04 am to 10MTNTiger
quote:
Interesting to know that you believe your personal feelings on the matter should dictate the fundamental rights of other citizens of this nation. Your logic puts you in good standing with many dictators, monarchs, and politicians that all know what is better for simple peasants.
I get what you're saying but this is something I struggle with. I think you SHOULD be trained at least a little bit MORE to get a carry license. EVERYONE should have a gun but not everyone should be carrying. Just my opinion based on what I've seen at gun ranges, etc.
To give you an example, when I went to my CCW course, I couldn't help but notice how many people in the class couldn't put a round into a target 5 yards away with a 22. A 5 inch barrel 22 (Ruger Mark III). Think about that for a second...
It's a little frightening to think that person would be carrying and could be potentially firing rounds in public.
With that said, I know that most situations where a gun is used, it's used within a few feet so maybe that's a moot point.
No license to own, definitely a license (or at least SOME training) to carry. Which is the way it is now anyways.
Posted on 11/7/13 at 3:28 pm to 10MTNTiger
quote:
Regulations on the second amendment are infringements, period. You acknowledge so much when you attempt to justify "degree[s] to which guns should be regulated."
quote:
Interesting to know that you believe your personal feelings on the matter should dictate the fundamental rights of other citizens of this nation. Your logic puts you in good standing with many dictators, monarchs, and politicians that all know what is better for simple peasants.
It was this little gem which prompted me to object to the position that thee should be no regulations. I'm not setting up a straw man. Got no desire to say anything other than we as a society should treat guns as serious as they are.
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News