Project 1999

Project 1999 (/forums/index.php)
-   Off Topic (/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=19)
-   -   ******Official politics thread ****** (/forums/showthread.php?t=260341)

Wonkie 11-15-2019 03:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BallzDeep (Post 3026259)
Guess I am not following you but the point was that you shouldn't need sanctuary cities with guns because it is already under the Supremacy Clause. Majority of the other things such as weed or anything else are luxuries that are not protected. But if ask my opinion on weed or other things, I completely agree it should be state rights.

But not only that majority of states have state laws as well that protect the right to bear arms.

http://www2.law.ucla.edu/volokh/beararms/statecon.htm

You're right that one is more valid.

Balkanization in all but name. 🙃

feniin 11-15-2019 03:26 PM

The Constitution is a living document that should be amended to reflect changes in society. We're beyond the need for private citizens to own guns.

suptoofs 11-15-2019 03:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by feniin (Post 3026292)
The Constitution is a living document that should be amended to reflect changes in society. We're beyond the need for private citizens to own guns.

While I agree with the first part of this, I am not in agreement about private citizens not owning guns.

Truthfully I am not for gun control. I believe in the context and in the sense of a being a collector that anything in the realm of warfare should be open to for ownership in a private collection or used in a way that doesn't condone violence (target shooting etc...). I do understand firearms and items of warfare were made specifically for violence and killing, but I think you understand the point I am making.

However, that being said, gun control is ABSOLUTELY necessary due to human nature. We are pieces of shit and cannot be relied on to do the right thing.

feniin 11-15-2019 03:44 PM

Private gun ownership for collections (non-operational guns) or target shooting (guns are retained at the range in a safe, ammo is tracked) would be okay, maybe. Just can't trust ammosexuals to abide by those rules.

Jimjam 11-15-2019 03:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BallzDeep (Post 3026217)
Sadly this is where cognitive dissonance takes place. You must not do a lot of history research or understand gun laws at all.

If you are a private citizen and have a CHL in the state of Texas, there is no law that requires you to submit a gun for any registry. They have absolutely no idea how many guns are out there. People can also sell private individual to private individual. Thus, you now can't even track guns you knew where they used to be.

When Sheriff's have been asked to do round ups when Beto was voicing his opinion. A large majority were telling him to go fuck himself. Majority of the police and military are on the side of the idea of the second amendment and that doesn't only apply to muskets like some idiot here stated. The sheriffs stated that it would be an open suicide mission because they don't want their officers fighting citizens over a right to defend themselves. It would cause more violence then mass shootings.

On your third point. You are completely neglecting that we are a country that came from a Tyrannical government and was overthrown by allowing citizens to own firearms. Since they had seen what tyrannical governments are capable of over an individual, they realized that individual freedoms trump the government. A mass shooter can kill maybe hundreds of people, a government can kill millions.

If it were ever to come down to people having to defend their civil liberties, you would quickly find that majority of the police and military would be on the side of the civilians (they want to own firearms as civilians as well) and it wouldn't be a lopsided battle for the citizens to regain the upper hand since there are as many guns in the US as people.

No government is going to immediately drone strike their people otherwise they would get the same treatment as the uproar from the boston massacre.

I want to point out, I'm not actually anti-civilian guns, I'm just disputing some of the points Tepplar is using to support his position.

The Tyranny was overthrown as 1) the revolution supported by another, antimonarchist, super empire. 2) The Tyranny thought the long term strategic move was to protect 'spice' colonies rather than 'sugar' so didn't invest in securing the sugar colony as much as it could. 3) The Tyranny believed it could still protect it's interests in the sugar colony without direct governance.

Furthermore, 'allowing the people to own firearms' was irrelevant to overthrowing the government: they were going to have firearms regardless of whether it was allowed or not, especially as the revolution was supported by a foreign superpower (props to La France for inspiring so much modern American foreign policy).

Historically revolutions need to either subvert the army, or have extensive support from a foreign power. Perhaps with the communication opportunities provided by the internet that will change and a few scattered militia with civilian grade fire arms can stand up to a tyranny, but I doubt it.

Teppler 11-15-2019 04:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jimjam (Post 3026324)
I want to point out, I'm not actually anti-civilian guns, I'm just disputing some of the points Tepplar is using to support his position.

The Tyranny was overthrown as 1) the revolution supported by another, antimonarchist, super empire. 2) The Tyranny thought the long term strategic move was to protect 'spice' colonies rather than 'sugar' so didn't invest in securing the sugar colony as much as it could. 3) The Tyranny believed it could still protect it's interests in the sugar colony without direct governance.

Furthermore, 'allowing the people to own firearms' was irrelevant to overthrowing the government: they were going to have firearms regardless of whether it was allowed or not, especially as the revolution was supported by a foreign superpower (props to La France for inspiring so much modern American foreign policy).

Historically revolutions need to either subvert the army, or have extensive support from a foreign power. Perhaps with the communication opportunities provided by the internet that will change and a few scattered militia with civilian grade fire arms can stand up to a tyranny, but I doubt it.

Imagine if the colonies weren’t armed and didn’t revolt. Would there be an America? The answer is no.

Would you go door to door if there’s a 50% chance you die? How about 25%? When you start answering these question you realize that those stats completely and utterly matter and less people are willing to go door to door if society is armed and dangerous towards them.

You are clearly wrong on all accounts.

Zeboim 11-15-2019 04:32 PM

There is no such thing as attempted bribery.

Just because your bribery fails does not make it not illegal. Making the offer at all makes it Bribery regardless of what the other side says, like robbing a bank.

That the GOP is using this defense right now is insanity.

feniin 11-15-2019 04:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zeboim (Post 3026365)
There is no such thing as attempted bribery.

Just because your bribery fails does not make it not illegal. Making the offer at all makes it Bribery regardless of what the other side says, like robbing a bank.

That the GOP is using this defense right now is insanity.

Wouldn't expect anything less.

Teppler 11-15-2019 04:42 PM

https://thenationalsentinel.com/2019...eachment-scam/

“I had a Democrat come to me, he even questioned whether he should stay a Democrat or he should reregister. He said this not the party that I know and he said these individuals in the direction that they’re going is totally wrong,” McCarthy told Fox News’ Sean Hannity on Wednesday.

Yikes for the democrats

Wonkie 11-15-2019 04:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Teppler (Post 3026369)
https://thenationalsentinel.com/2019...eachment-scam/

“I had a Democrat come to me, he even questioned whether he should stay a Democrat or he should reregister. He said this not the party that I know and he said these individuals in the direction that they’re going is totally wrong,” McCarthy told Fox News’ Sean Hannity on Wednesday.

Yikes for the democrats

Did this take place in a hipster coffee shop? :rolleyes:


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:50 AM.

Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.