- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- 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: How do so many Americans have a fundamental misunderstanding of the 2nd amendment?
Posted on 2/18/18 at 5:22 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
Posted on 2/18/18 at 5:22 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
Lot of bullshite back in forth in this thread. The issue of the 2nd and why it was implemented has been settled. It’s really not up for debate and it’s not going to be repealed.....not for military style firearms or any others.
0
Posted on 2/18/18 at 5:36 pm to LSUgrad08112
quote:
the 2nd Amendment was drafted specifically to allow civilian weaponry to be on par with our military’s small arms
I'd like a nuke. Where can I legally purchase one under your warped view of the 2nd Amendment?
quote:
The entire purpose of the 2nd Amendment is to allow the citizens of the United States to compete with a government equipped fighting force
Once the government learned how to drop bombs from planes, the 'citizens of the United States' no longer had the capacity to compete with a government-equipped fighting force.
Posted on 2/18/18 at 5:43 pm to BamaAtl
quote:
like a nuke. Where can I legally purchase one under your warped view of the 2nd Amendment
How many times are you loons going to trot out this argument to absurdity?
People don't buy nukes because they're not an effective defensive weapon. They're also expensive as hell.
But...If you had the money and wanted a nuke there's nothing stopping you from obtaining one if you look in the right place.
This post was edited on 2/18/18 at 5:44 pm
Posted on 2/18/18 at 5:44 pm to HC87
quote:Between you and I we have a combined 54 years of uniformed service. But this guy knows better than us the history of the Armed Forces.
I retired from the Marine Corps in 2011, after 24 years.
Posted on 2/18/18 at 5:46 pm to BamaAtl
quote:
Once the government learned how to drop bombs from planes, the 'citizens of the United States' no longer had the capacity to compete with a government-equipped fighting force.
In the real world Winning wars requires putting boots on the ground. Turn off the Xbox and have mom fix you a hot pocket.
Posted on 2/18/18 at 5:49 pm to thebigmuffaletta
quote:
How many times are you loons going to trot out this argument
Until you get the point.
quote:
If you had the money and wanted a nuke there's nothing stopping you from obtaining one if you look in the right place.
This is not true
Posted on 2/18/18 at 5:51 pm to thebigmuffaletta
quote:
thebigmuffaletta
You're only a guerrilla insurgent against the US government in your fantasies.
In the real world, you'd get your arse killed the moment the government decided to end you.
Posted on 2/18/18 at 5:51 pm to BamaAtl
quote:
this is not true
Nations get nukes all the time despite their being laws and rules that prevent them from getting nukes.
Posted on 2/18/18 at 5:51 pm to Wolfhound45
quote:
Between you and I we have a combined 54 years of uniformed service. But this guy knows better than us the history of the Armed Forces.
Add me and that total jumps to 72 years.
Posted on 2/18/18 at 5:52 pm to BamaAtl
Then why do you want to ban civilian firearms if they're so ineffective? You can't have it both ways. If they're ineffective pea shooters then there's no harm in owning them.
Posted on 2/18/18 at 5:54 pm to thebigmuffaletta
quote:
Nations get nukes all the time despite their being laws and rules that prevent them from getting nukes.
The Point
--WHOOOOOSH--
You
Posted on 2/18/18 at 5:55 pm to BamaAtl
So what you're saying is gun laws don't work?
Thanks
Thanks
Posted on 2/18/18 at 5:55 pm to thebigmuffaletta
quote:
why do you want to ban civilian firearms if they're so ineffective?
I don't, I want to make them harder to acquire.
Because we know that doing so saves lives.
Posted on 2/18/18 at 5:55 pm to BamaAtl
quote:
I'd like a nuke. Where can I legally purchase one under your warped view of the 2nd Amendment?
Can you read? Civilians have never had access to WMD's or artillery. That's why I included "small arms" in my post. Solely so idiots like you wouldn't be able to derail the thread with a bunch of retarded ultra hypothetical what-ifs.
Do you not understand that if someone had the disposable income and human capital required to finance the incredibly difficult process of creating a nuke and procuring the materials to do so, that they'd more than likely fall under the category of "small government" or "terrorist group" and not private citizen? Has that never dawned on you?
quote:
Once the government learned how to drop bombs from planes, the 'citizens of the United States' no longer had the capacity to compete with a government-equipped fighting force.
They used to "drop bombs" from warships all the time in 1776. They were called naval artillery strikes. Being blown up by a ship nets the same outcome against an armed civilian as being blown up by a plane. Impossible for someone with an AK to defend or fight back against, but the framers of the constitution STILL included the 2nd amendment. Hmm...
It's almost like you people don't spend absolutely any time thinking about these things or researching them and you're more concerned with playing partisan politics over a freak tragedy taking away .0000000523% of our population than actually benefiting society in any way.
This post was edited on 2/18/18 at 5:56 pm
Posted on 2/18/18 at 5:58 pm to BamaAtl
quote:
I don't, I want to make them harder to acquire.
Which is just another way of you saying you want to create all sorts of arbitrary laws that will ban firearms.
Posted on 2/18/18 at 6:01 pm to thebigmuffaletta
quote:
So what you're saying is gun laws don't work?
In this example, if they didn't, everyone who wanted a nuke would have one.
Gotta lot of regular people owning nukes in the US, do we?
Thought not.
Posted on 2/18/18 at 6:04 pm to LSUgrad08112
quote:
Civilians have never had access to WMD's or artillery.
Surely if the founders didn't want us to have them, they would have put that in the 2nd Amendment. Where is it, specifically?
quote:
Do you not understand that if someone had the disposable income and human capital required to finance the incredibly difficult process of creating a nuke and procuring the materials to do so, that they'd more than likely fall under the category of "small government" or "terrorist group" and not private citizen?
They'd also be in the category of "in violation of US law," but you seem to have missed that.
quote:
They used to "drop bombs" from warships all the time in 1776.
Lotta naval artillery coming Kansas's way in your fever dreams, is there?
It's almost like you, like your little buddy up there, are completely missing the point. I'm not sure if it's intentional, or you're just not able to grasp it.
Posted on 2/18/18 at 6:04 pm to thebigmuffaletta
quote:
Which is just another way of you saying you want to create all sorts of arbitrary laws that will ban firearms.
Not at all.
And not arbitrary. Let's use the ones that work.
Posted on 2/18/18 at 6:05 pm to BamaAtl
You are a certified idiot.
It's already been explained to you why your average Joe doesn't buy nukes. They aren't an effective defensive weapon and they're expensive as hell.
And of course you ignored the entire point I made while you were trying to move the goalposts. There's plenty of international laws that are designed to prevent nation states from getting nukes yet the still do. So you unwittingly acknowledged that laws designed to keep people from buying certain arms don't work.
It's already been explained to you why your average Joe doesn't buy nukes. They aren't an effective defensive weapon and they're expensive as hell.
And of course you ignored the entire point I made while you were trying to move the goalposts. There's plenty of international laws that are designed to prevent nation states from getting nukes yet the still do. So you unwittingly acknowledged that laws designed to keep people from buying certain arms don't work.
Posted on 2/18/18 at 6:06 pm to BamaAtl
quote:
not arbitrary. Let's use the ones that work.
Sure they're arbitrary. You want laws that say person X can't own gun Y because of reason Z.
Page 6 of 28
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News