Texas Passes Constitutional Carry.

Discuss the news, current events, politics, etc.

Re: Texas Passes Constitutional Carry.

Unread postby Derek » 29 October 2021, 00:33

In my experience, leftists want you to read a book, mainstream conservatives and democrats want you to google something, and alt-right people want you to watch a youtube video.
User avatar
Derek
 
Posts: 6967
+1s received: 2715
Joined: 21 December 2012, 02:12
Country: United States (us)

Re: Texas Passes Constitutional Carry.

Unread postby pozzie » 29 October 2021, 02:13

CaffeineMan wrote:I can’t take the icbm argument seriously


So what argument do you take seriously for individuals possessing assault weapons, armour piercing ammo, RPG or AT4 launchers?

Generally I see arguments based on protecting one, one's family, and one's property from some perceived threat. I've simply expressed the threat I perceive, don't I have the same constitutional right to protection?

We, as Americans, have been wrestling with exactly where such a line can be drawn and there is certainly a current in 2nd Amendment defense that argues for no line since one isn't provided for in the amendment as written and ratified (though, alas, there appears to be a lack of uniformity in what was actually ratified by the various states).
— formerly pozboro
User avatar
pozzie
 
Posts: 457
+1s received: 106
Joined: 4 June 2021, 20:43
Location: Oregon USA

Re: Texas Passes Constitutional Carry.

Unread postby PopTart » 29 October 2021, 03:38

pozboro wrote:
CaffeineMan wrote:I can’t take the icbm argument seriously

We, as Americans, have been wrestling with exactly where such a line can be drawn and there is certainly a current in 2nd Amendment defense that argues for no line since one isn't provided for in the amendment as written and ratified (though, alas, there appears to be a lack of uniformity in what was actually ratified by the various states).
In fairness, the founding fathers didn't have to account for assault rifles and grenade launchers. Most private citizens probably weren't in possession of canons, mortars and howitzers :rofl:

But I think you alight on the crux of the issue.

The original intent, was probably well founded, it created a culture of gun ownership linked emotively to the concept of personal sovereignty that has only grown with time, as most traditions do.

The rational arguments don't work, because they don't speak to the emotional, cultural angle.
ImageImage
User avatar
PopTart
 
Posts: 3546
+1s received: 2755
Joined: 12 December 2017, 11:15
Country: United Kingdom (gb)

Re: Texas Passes Constitutional Carry.

Unread postby Brenden » 29 October 2021, 11:21

The 2nd Amendment was only interpreted to bestow an individual right to broad-scale gun ownership in the last 50 or so years. For the vast majority of the United States’ history, it was interpreted as bestowing a right to ”well regulated” gun ownership in the context of militias and militia-involvement. (And of course back then militias weren’t just clubs for extremist yahoos.)

“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.”

Furthermore, the National Rifle Association was originally founded as an association of marksmanship clubs whose aim was to improve the baseline gun skills of Americans, which was seen to be very lacking when needed during (I believe) WWI (or perhaps the Spanish-American War?). It wasn’t until, again, about 50 years ago that it was co-opted by extremist elements — I think there is literally video of the exact AGM in which a sort of coup took place and all of the long-time leadership was replaced by gun fanatics.
Disclaimer: All views expressed in my posts are my own and do not reflect the views of this forum except when otherwise stated or this signature is not present.

ImageImageImageImage
User avatar
Brenden
Administrator
 
Posts: 8996
+1s received: 3421
Joined: 20 December 2012, 20:12
Location: Lanarkshire, Scotland
Country: United Kingdom (gb)

Re: Texas Passes Constitutional Carry.

Unread postby CaffeineMan » 29 October 2021, 12:42

Us v miller was of the opinion that arms consistent with militia service should be the guide. You aren’t bringing an ICBM to a gunfight.

Are you of the opinion that America can’t ever look like one of the lesser nations in various states of collapse? The AR has and will maintain a legitimate place in civilian hands.

God knows I won’t give mine up.



pozboro wrote:
CaffeineMan wrote:I can’t take the icbm argument seriously


So what argument do you take seriously for individuals possessing assault weapons, armour piercing ammo, RPG or AT4 launchers?

Generally I see arguments based on protecting one, one's family, and one's property from some perceived threat. I've simply expressed the threat I perceive, don't I have the same constitutional right to protection?

We, as Americans, have been wrestling with exactly where such a line can be drawn and there is certainly a current in 2nd Amendment defense that argues for no line since one isn't provided for in the amendment as written and ratified (though, alas, there appears to be a lack of uniformity in what was actually ratified by the various states).
CaffeineMan
 
Posts: 20
+1s received: 2
Joined: 17 June 2021, 17:34
Country: United States (us)

Re: Texas Passes Constitutional Carry.

Unread postby pozzie » 29 October 2021, 18:28

CaffeineMan wrote:Us v miller was of the opinion that arms consistent with militia service should be the guide. You aren’t bringing an ICBM to a gunfight.

Are you of the opinion that America can’t ever look like one of the lesser nations in various states of collapse? The AR has and will maintain a legitimate place in civilian hands.

God knows I won’t give mine up.


Think we've clearly seen the country join "the lesser nations" whatever that means - but clearly Jan 6 is a good example as was the police's inability (or unwillingness) to deal with various protests that got "out of hand" - call them riots, insurrections, mayhem, whatever.

But I think US jurisprudence has moved on since the decision you mention and the clear trend is away from any limitations on the ownership and possession of weaponry by individuals who haven't been convicted of a crime. Thus why a guy living in a tiny apartment can have an AR -- clearly way more protection that puts innocents in harms way, but that's perfectly okay because we are comfortable allowing fear to dictate policy.

Can't wait to see these principles applied to the types of folks that died in Waco and Ruby Ridge -- see, the real problem is they didn't have real weapons. I mean we are talking about fighting the government of one the most heavily armed states on the planet and, after all, that's one of the pillars of private ownership - protection from the tyranny of the state.

So, I ask again, why can't individuals have rocket launchers and missile systems if they have to protect themselves from a state (the US federal government, just so we're crystal clear) that is clearly failing?
— formerly pozboro
User avatar
pozzie
 
Posts: 457
+1s received: 106
Joined: 4 June 2021, 20:43
Location: Oregon USA

Re: Texas Passes Constitutional Carry.

Unread postby Derek » 29 October 2021, 18:38

CaffeineMan wrote:Are you of the opinion that America can’t ever look like one of the lesser nations in various states of collapse?

Name every nation in order of lesserness
User avatar
Derek
 
Posts: 6967
+1s received: 2715
Joined: 21 December 2012, 02:12
Country: United States (us)

Re: Texas Passes Constitutional Carry.

Unread postby AGIS » 8 November 2021, 11:54

Seen some points here I'd like to jump on, first being Brendens;

The second amendment does indeed say what you posted, but in that, as found (countless times) by the supreme court, that statement also includes civilian firearms ownership. "The right of the people to keep and bear arms" is pretty clear.

Someone else said the Framers couldn't foretell the rise of modern weaponry, which is absolute nonsense. That was an era of unprecedented leaps in the manufacturing of firearms (from mortars, to flintlock machine guns, all existed in that era), and I'm sure they knew that it wasn't just going to stop after they died. Saying the second amendment doesn't apply to modern firearms is like saying the first amendment doesn't apply to anything you say on the internet, because they couldn't have seen the rise of the web.

Firearms are a fundamentally American right. I honestly think the laws are WAY to strict as they are now, and they should be abolished (yes, all of them).

"dO yoU wAnT cRiMiNAls tO oWn nUkeS!?!?"

Show me one street thug that can afford a nuke, ICBM, or tank.....

Pont is guns are a fundamental right, they do FAR more good than harm, and well, they're freaking fun. I've never once heard a logical argument against gun ownership.
AGIS
 
Posts: 97
+1s received: 15
Joined: 16 April 2016, 23:58
Country: United States (us)

Re: Texas Passes Constitutional Carry.

Unread postby Bimm » 8 November 2021, 18:08

Everyone has the right to defend themselves. Those of us who carry concealed or openly do not take lightly the fact that we have a responsibility to only shoot in self defense or in defense of others.
Bimm
 
Posts: 16
+1s received: 2
Joined: 8 November 2021, 17:48
Location: Houston, TX USA
Country: United States (us)

Re: Texas Passes Constitutional Carry.

Unread postby Brenden » 12 November 2021, 22:31

AGIS wrote:The second amendment does indeed say what you posted, but in that, as found (countless times) by the supreme court, that statement also includes civilian firearms ownership. "The right of the people to keep and bear arms" is pretty clear.

Countless times in the last 50 years. For the first 200 years of the country's history a broad individual right was not the Supreme Court or lawmakers' interpretation.

AGIS wrote:Firearms are a fundamentally American right. I honestly think the laws are WAY to strict as they are now, and they should be abolished (yes, all of them).

A violent death rate 5-10 times higher than other developed countries is also a fundamentally American issue, lol. Just because something is American doesn't make it good. I mean, look at American "cheese".

AGIS wrote:"dO yoU wAnT cRiMiNAls tO oWn nUkeS!?!?"

Show me one street thug that can afford a nuke, ICBM, or tank.....

Criminals can also be members of organized crime syndicates and drug cartels, who are awash with cash due to America's stupid war on drugs.

AGIS wrote:Pont is guns are a fundamental right, they do FAR more good than harm, and well, they're freaking fun. I've never once heard a logical argument against gun ownership.

Without just saying "bEcAuSe iT'S In tHe cOnStItUtIoN" please justify how they are a fundamental right?

Also please justify with evidence the statement that they do "FAR" more good than harm. Because that is contrary to the findings I posted earlier.
Disclaimer: All views expressed in my posts are my own and do not reflect the views of this forum except when otherwise stated or this signature is not present.

ImageImageImageImage
User avatar
Brenden
Administrator
 
Posts: 8996
+1s received: 3421
Joined: 20 December 2012, 20:12
Location: Lanarkshire, Scotland
Country: United Kingdom (gb)

Re: Texas Passes Constitutional Carry.

Unread postby pozzie » 12 November 2021, 23:51

Brenden wrote:Also please justify with evidence not concocted by the NRA the statement that they do "FAR" more good than harm. Because that is contrary to the findings I posted earlier.


ftfy
— formerly pozboro
User avatar
pozzie
 
Posts: 457
+1s received: 106
Joined: 4 June 2021, 20:43
Location: Oregon USA

Previous

Recently active
Users browsing this forum: CommonCrawl [Bot] and 16 guests