Can we have an honest, respectful discussion about guns in America?

More guns than ever accidental gun death are pretty the same per as they were in the fifties. I am all for training and not just marksmanship either. If you are going to carry you need to learn to think tactically. That means suiting your ammuntion and weapon of choice to your goal in a given environment, understanding where the appropriate fire lanes are, what sort of bullet stop is behind your target and what's likely behind it. I'm not a big fan of rifles for home defense simply because sheet tock sucks as a bullet stop and a wood frame house if you don't hit a stud means even a 5.56 jacketed round van place you next door neighbor inadvertently in harms way.

 

I'll add my two cents for what they're worth.

The second amendment, like the entire constitution is intermittently interpreted to apply to everybody within the united states, rather than what it was originally intended to be, which was only between the individual states and the federal government. States can, and do, have their own gun laws, which is constitutional.

The idea was that states would be able to have a military in case the federal government went over to the dark side, and the federal government can't say a damn thing about it. If we were to apply the bill of rights to everybody, it would be a complete mess. The military would not only be voluntary, but would not be able to punish people for not following orders.

 

A slight disagreement. While I strongly support gun training for any gun owner, I more strongly disagree with tying Constitutional rights to "training". The precedent is too easily exploited.

 

Dude, I respectfully recommend you review your own posts for straw man arguments.

 

edit:

Yes, it would be hell if we were to apply training to constitutional rights. We would no longer have rights.

 

Am I correct in assuming that your diversion confirms that you lack the will to significantly reduce the firearm carnage in the US?

If you with to perpetuate the status quo of folks being shot to death at a much, much higher rate than in any other advanced nation, that is your position.

If you should decide it is unacceptable, please share your ideas, if any.

 

I have the perfect plan to reduce the number of gun-related deaths in the US by 2/3:
Ban suicide.
Done!

 

No, not any requirement to exercise rights. Many LWers believe the Constitution limits our rights, that's the entire purpose of their anti-gun movement, but the reality is the Constitution limits the Federal government and we all have our "unalienable rights" as human beings.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

 

"Violent people" are known through the violence they have already committed.

Society has the right to defend itself against potential firearm carnage in a pro-active way.

 

Some 90% of violent crime is committed by people who have a history of violence. The recent church shooting is an excellent example.

 

Why aren't you willing to ban suicide and cut gun-related deaths in the US by 2/3?
Why do you like people killing themselves?

 

As you can see, I edited my previous response. I guess my comprehension skills need improvement.

I don't think left wingers care about the constitution at all, unless it can be used to try and further their collectivist totalitarian agenda. If it actually protects rights, they ignore it. If it can be used in a sophistic way to take rights, then suddenly they're all constitutional lawyers.

 

Why not support me in saving many more lives?

 

Yes, by arming themselves against criminals. Do you agree or do you believe the best way to confront an armed criminal is to render yourself defenseless?

 

Can we have an honest, respectful discussion about guns in America?. . . . I don't think so.

 

Does your idea on saving more lives have something to do with giving the government more power?

 

The constitution stands in their way. That is exactly what it was written to do.

 

We agree. I was saying where I got trained and believe training is good. But would not make it part of the constitution to include training.

Damnedest thing happened to me today. I was off at PBS discussing PBS reports and said, can't recall why, but reported where I served in the Army in Germany and so on. Some nut told me I was telling him I served in Artillery and yet no place at no time did I bring up Artillery. I never served in Artillery. He seemed not to understand what a battalion amounts to. Some on the forum defended me. All is good.

 

No, all it contains is the desire for the private sector to keep working on medical issues.

 

They're always doing that, so no problems.

 

Are you kidding? Try to bribe a cop in any of those areas. Mexico is one of the most corrupt nations on earth

 

I appreciate your effort but no fake devil can really speak for the real thing

Liberals want all the guns and will not stop nagging till they get them

So I agree with the position of no compromise

Period

 

If you ban high capacity magazines do you think the gang bangers will turn theirs in?

 

So? You have no problem with your neighbor having his own ICBM.

 

I agree with this also. You can make the argument that liberals are doing more to ensure there is no compromise on guns than conservative gun owners. Thats because gun owners understand that liberals ultimate goal is removal of guns not regulation, therefore there cant be anymore compromise.