Gun control laws will become irrelevant

Americans kick ass. Although it is easy to get discouraged by those trying to subvert the American Way, there are still real Americans out there doing what Americans do: solving problems and defending liberty. Amidst all this talk by the government and liberals of infringing upon the 2nd Amendment, some creative, freedom-loving people have done something to combat this encroachment.

http://www.popsci.com/technology/article/2012-07/working-assault-rifle-made-3-d-printer

So Obama, Feinstein, and others who want to take the rights that many heroic people died for can shove it up their asses. We the People will not take it lying down.

Let freedom ring.

 

Idiots printing guns are going to ruin the potential 3d printing has to accomplish good in the world.

 

Why? Because you fear inanimate objects? Do you shake when you walk into your kitchen fearing the knives will jump out of the drawer and kill you?

 

Yes, I'm afraid the kitchen knives will jump out of the drawer and kill me. Any more enlightening tid bits, or are you done?

 

Why do you not support the Constitution completely? Respect minorities, gays, religion and liberty for all. What makes you above all for knowing what is best for people you have never seen or had bread with?

Is it that you lack respect?

 

The constitution is just ink and paper.

 

What about respect for others?

 

Should I be allowed to own a nuclear weapon, why isn't that covered by the second amendment?

 

What about mutual respect?

 

I respect others, i don't think you should be allowed to own a firearm.

It has nothing to do with respect.

 

Thanks for your opinion. Hope you find wellness soon.

 

Does the second amendment protect my right to bear nuclear arms? If not, why not? Where is the line?

 

Healing takes time and love and please surround yourself with both. Should we get rid of the the internet for 1A and go back to the manual printing press and word of mouth for freedom of speech? If not, why not?

I hope this helps you on your journey with healing:

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct...-g4sdUkeN4w6IpbgBArqr6w&bvm=bv.42965579,d.b2I

 

From a logical standpoint, the line should be drawn at WMDs. The 2nd Amendment is there so people can defend themselves. WMDs have no defensive use. Hell, you can't even aim the things.

 

The second amendment mentions nothing about self defense

 

So you're saying we SHOULD have WMDs, then?

 

Nobody is forcing you to stay here, you were given rights that no government can take away, if you wish not to exercise those riights, that's fine, but don't think for a minute you can delegate how other people choose to exercise there rights.

Maybe communist russia would be a better fit for you? This "peice of paper and ink" secures your rights for feedom, something a lot of countries dont have. Men have spilled blood and watched friends die. Wives and children lose husbands and fathers to help uphold this peice of paper. You make me sick, you are a disgrace to this nation and your outlook on this matter is completly pathetic.

 

It gives us the right to possess arms, the use for self defense comes with the territory.

 

Why do you think I should not own a firearm?

 

That was kind of my point. There are only two uses for weapons: offense and defense. I don't think that the second amendment was put there so that we could initiate violence (otherwise when confronted with a murder charge, we could cite the 2nd). The underlying right that the 2nd amendment upholds is that of self-defense, even if it doesn't specify that.

 

PBS did a great piece on the history of firearms. At the end they interviewed the individual who made his own AR15. It was a very interesting segment. I personally don't own one anymore, but I can see the appeal in making one.

Regarding the second amendment, there is no provision for self defense, and the laws of the time made it very clear why firearms were to be owned.

It wasn't till after the Civil War that the more modern interpretation of the 2nd came about. Of course if you were a Freedman, getting a firearm still would have been nearly impossible.

 

Resort to strawman fallacy when you have no answer. Typical.

- - - Updated - - -

If you mean a freed slave, the first gun control laws were racist in nature.

 

Didn't know i was trying to delegate your rights.

An amendment to the constitution is all it would take to take away your right to own a firearm though. Live by the constitution, die by it.

Russia was never communist, and no one has died fighting for my freedom.

 

Yes I meant the freed slaves. If you are ever bored look up who the founders of the NRA were and then compare to the Union officers who were for taking firearms from the recently freed slaves. Look at the history, it is rather eye opening considering where the NRA stands now....

 

While I agree with the sentiment, it is only an addition reason amongst many why gun grabbing in the USA is simply not possible. They could do a Canadian style scheme and demand registration of our 300,000,000 existing guns, get a few tens of millions of arms registered, pretend that was all there are, grab those and declare victory, but there will still be a vast armed society out there biding their time for a return to the real America and a driving of todays trash from Washington.

- - - Updated - - -

I thought it was right on point as the entire grabber position is irrational fear being exploited by pandering and evil politicians.