Talking with liberals about the 2nd amendment

Nothing like a good conspiracy theory. Show us where this has happened. Gun ownership in Australia is higher now than when our gun laws were introduced for example. That line is just NRA propaganda.

 

I spent over 9 years as a crime scene technician for several Law Enforcement Agencies. I worked one sort-of personal defense gun case in that entire
time. I worked numerous domestic violence cases where a gun was used on a spouse or child and one accidental shooting of a child by his brother - that was the worst.

 

Here's the appropriate language from Heller:

"(3) The handgun ban and the trigger-lock requirement (as applied to self-defense) violate the Second Amendment. The District’s total ban on handgun possession in the home amounts to a prohibition on an entire class of “arms” that Americans overwhelmingly choose for the lawful purpose of self-defense. Under any of the standards of scrutiny the Court has applied to enumerated constitutional rights, this prohibition – in the place where the importance of the lawful defense of self, family, and property is most acute – would fail constitutional muster. Similarly, the requirement that any lawful firearm in the home be disassembled or bound by a trigger lock makes it impossible for citizens to use arms for the core lawful purpose of self-defense and is hence unconstitutional. Because Heller conceded at oral argument that the D.C. licensing law is permissible if it is not enforced arbitrarily and capriciously, the Court assumes that a license will satisfy his prayer for relief and does not address the licensing requirement. Assuming he is not disqualified from exercising Second Amendment rights, the District must permit Heller to register his handgun and must issue him a license to carry it in the home. Pp. 56–64."

I think keeping guns locked up away from kids and other unauthorized users is a great idea. I bought a gun safe before I ever brought a gun into my house. It should be highly encouraged, perhaps with tax incentives for gun safe purchase, Project Childsafe, which I support, gives away trigger locks. I've never bought a new gun that didn't have one in the box.

I also have no problem prosecuting people for negligence should someone get hold of their guns. That's not an NRA issue - that's an unwillingness of the part of local DA's to prosecute parents who just lost a child or loved one.

 

Well, the courts can disagree with you on the Constitutional part - but what you simply CANNOT argue, is that those restrictions have cascaded into
laws that prevent the expansion of gun availability or CC permits. In fact - American citizens can carry guns in MORE places than they could 30 years ago.

 

I'm not worried about Australia. It hasn't happened here because we've fought against it successfully. The NFA 1934 law which restricted machine guns was originally to restrict handguns, and when that failed they added "concealable" long guns to the list of restricted firearms.

Two Ohio senators just released a bill, SB 260, that reclassifies nearly all pistols as "assault weapons" and would outlaw the possession of such.

We know the will is out there.

 

Please show any link between NFA 1934, the Hughes Amendment and the expansion of CCW in the US.

 

YOU were the one arguing that ANY gun restriction would cause ALL guns to be at risk. I merely pointed out that some restrictions DID NOT put all guns at risk.

 

hopefully the people who actually enacted such crap would be the first casualties. that sort of nonsense would justify a rebellion

 

the mentality is the same-if you believe the way to deter criminals is to limit what honest people can own, deep down you're a gun banner

 

Most probably couldn't make any liberal friends. I mean listen to her, so narrow minded no matter she needs a gun. The usual bull, nothing new here.

 

Really? You're going to start shooting cops who are fathers and husbands because you can't buy a 100 round magazine anymore?


Really?

 

Tell you what - you process a crime scene where a young boy was able to get his hands on a loaded 9mm and accidentally shoot his
little brother and then you tell me that there shouldn't be some restrictions on gun storage and ownership.

Again - I'm not against private gun ownership - but if you want to call me a "gun-banner" because I've actually SEEN what can happen, not just
roll off some obscure numbers - then so be it.

 

Similar to going to war against your own people, sometimes brother against brother, father against son. Slaughter, why, for the right to own other human beings. Result, 100's of thousand dead Americans, what for, nothing, they lost.

Good ol US of A. The worlds greatest democracy. At the point of a gun. You have the best Congress money can buy.

 

I spent 24 years as a federal prosecutor. One of the cases I was involved in -a 4 foot distance between a sawed off shotgun and a bank teller's left breast when the gun went off. Nothing you have seen is going to bother me after that case. and yes people should store weapons safely around children but if the thought of losing your kid doesn't bother you, what is

 

You're assuming that they aren't still at risk. Does a requirement to register all of your guns put your gun rights at risk? Does a requirement to store all of your guns in a safe put your gun rights at risk?

 

The right to carry a gun, no.

 

Which/what guns have accidentally killed over 1200 children? Cite?
How do you think this creates a sound argument for banning them?

This violates the constitution - SCotUS said so, in 2008.

As will this - never the mind the fact it is wholly unnecessary.

Speak for yourself. Most of the time, I find the arguments for such things nothing more than fallacious appeals to emotion, ignorance and/or dishonesty. and/or restrictions that violate the constitution (see above)

You mean the leftist stance. Until you repeal the 2nd, you aren't winning anything, and maybe not even then.

The left seeks to lay as many restriction so the right to keep and bear arms as it can - no one believes it will settle for a useless and ineffective ban on 'assault weapons' or useless and unenforceable universal background checks -- and NO one believes the left seeks compromise because it never offers anything in return for the restrictions it wants.
And so the pro gun side rightly does not give an inch.

 

Still waiting for you to deliver and defend a position not based on fallacious appeals to emotion, ignorance and/or dishonesty.

 

Not so much after you read the ruling that declared as such.
You don't have much interest in that, so I shan't bother supplying a link.

 

Which gun rights should we give up, then?

 

???

 

Nice appeal to emotion fallacy you have there.

How many kids are accidentally killed each year with a firearm? Hint: 151 (average per year, 1999-2016)
How many guns in the US? Hint: ~360,000,000
What % of firearms are involved in the accidental killing of a child? Hint: https://www.desmos.com/scientific

 

I figured you ignored my earlier challenge, so I'd remind you.

http://www.politicalforum.com/index...lt-style-rifles.527387/page-9#post-1068767678

 

The right to leave a gun laying around unattended, the right to own a gun without strict checks. The right to own an unregistered gun, the right to own a gun that is deemed unsafe <Rule 3>