Ain't gun control wonderful???

Status
Not open for further replies.
Gonz

Gonz

molṑn labé
Staff member
spike said:
Ah, so you're saying our military is not Constitutionally mandated? Interesting.
Click to expand...

Actually, you're closer to the truth than you think.

A standing federal army is questionably constitutional.

The is why the National Gaurd is run by the State & why militias are needed.

A government that does not fear its citizens has nothing to fear from controlling them.
 
spike

spike

New Member
So would you be cool with getting rid of the Army, Marines, and Air Force and going with a National Guard / Militia system?
 
Gonz

Gonz

molṑn labé
Staff member
Not really.

The founding fathers did not want a standing federal army. In fact, they opposed them. However, in a world of air travel & supersonic missiles, it might be necessary. Given the wording of section 8, it is Constitutional.

WW2 taught us that isolatioism can be quite damaging.
 
ResearchMonkey

ResearchMonkey

Well-Known Member
spike said:
No, when you're wrong you ignore the post. I answer questions. You don't. You still haven't answered mine from days ago.

You do troll a lot though.
Click to expand...

Now that is funny! How did I know you wouldn't be able to figure out the answer to your question unless it was fed to you with a spoon. :retard:

I don't ignore you, I just don't play your silly games.
 
spike

spike

New Member
ResearchMonkey said:
Now that is funny! How did I know you wouldn't be able to figure out the answer to your question unless it was fed to you with a spoon.
Click to expand...

Oh you mean you didn't answer the yes or no question but went out of your way and typed many many words in order to evade it. Kinda like you were ascared.

I don't ignore you, I just don't play your silly games.
Click to expand...

Nope, when you're wrong you ignore the part of the post that showed you to be wrong or ignore the whole post "speechless".

That is your silly game.
 
randomJACKASS

randomJACKASS

Banned
Gonz said:
Not really.

The founding fathers did not want a standing federal army. In fact, they opposed them. However, in a world of air travel & supersonic missiles, it might be necessary. Given the wording of section 8, it is Constitutional.

WW2 taught us that isolatioism can be quite damaging.
Click to expand...

Oh I like how it's OK to adapt government to fit the times so long as Gonz agrees! Cool I'll take a mental note and I am sure our government will adopt that as future policy!
 
spike

spike

New Member
Right, when you get backed into a corner you ignore and throw a little tantrum with your silly insults. It's childish.
 
Gonz

Gonz

molṑn labé
Staff member
randomJACKASS said:
Oh I like how it's OK to adapt government to fit the times so long as Gonz agrees! Cool I'll take a mental note and I am sure our government will adopt that as future policy!
Click to expand...

Instead of attacking, show me where I'm wrong.

I'm not absolutely convinced on either side of this issue. The Constitution does allow Congress to create an Army. It does not give a time frame. It does not abolish standing federal armies. The founding fathers were agaisnt them, not the Constitution. It was easier to raise an army when they were traveling on horseback or marching.

When you have two hours to scramble a fleet of fighters to stop an invasion, it's easier when you don't need to scour the country side looking for your pilots.
 
Professur

Professur

Well-Known Member
MrBishop said:
Your numbers are off...
Under new section 84(3)(d)(i), a weapon not designed or adapted to discharge a shot, bullet or other projectile at a muzzle velocity exceeding 152.4 m per second or at a muzzle energy exceeding 5.7 Joules is deemed not to be a firearm (for the listed purposes).
Faster than that can cause serious bodily injury or even death.

!>500fps - Get her a Daisy
Winchester 500 x .177 calber 490 fps
Click to expand...

Link please. As I said, 400fps was the figure given to me by customs. It was the figure over which they refuse import without paperwork.
 
Inkara1

Inkara1

Well-Known Member
spike said:
Fair enough, but they're kinda addressed in the same section.

To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;

To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;

To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;

This Militia is supposed to be given arms and trained and employed and officers appointed.
Click to expand...

They're addressed in the same section, but so are taxation, the national debt, regulation of commerce, naturalization, bankruptcy law, coining money, establishing a standard of weights and measures, punishing counterfeiters, copyrights, courts lower than the Supreme Court, punishing piracy and felonies on the high seas and declaring war. Those are a lot of unrelated things.

There's an organized militia (what we know today as the state National Guard) and the unorganized militia (all white men ages 18-45 who are citizens or have expressed a desire to become one). They give guns to and train the National Guard; for rounding up the unorganized militia (because the founding fathers opposed a standing army) it sure is a lot quicker to get things going if the militia men already have a gun and know how to use it.
 
randomJACKASS

randomJACKASS

Banned
A $30 Crossman CO² .177 calibre BB gun is no toy! It is a target practice or small rodent killing tool. Mine will put a hole in your car, so, it is conceivable it could kill someone. Kids need to be taught that guns of any kind are tools. I agree that outside of squirt guns, and paintball or laser tag, that there is no real good that will likely come of a kid to have a toy gun. A squirt gun is a toy, but it as well is a tool, for spraying water, or fun or to train cats. The key is teaching the kid all about guns, not just saying here here is a toy, and then letting them have a BB gun and eventually a real one without being taught to respect all guns from the start.
 
MrBishop

MrBishop

Well-Known Member
International.gif
 
Professur

Professur

Well-Known Member
A useless graph, Bish. Intentional firearms deaths related to percent of homes with arms ... meaningless. What percent were from arms belonging to that house, as opposed to brought in? How many intentional deaths without firearms? How many deaths prevented by homes with arms?
 
MrBishop

MrBishop

Well-Known Member
800px-Ushomicidesbyweapon.svg.png


In relation to self-defense using a gun (in the home) ...it amounts to 2 out of every 1000 crimes. Twice for every 1000 crimes, someone managed to reach their gun and of those, 1/4 used it. The other 998 times, the gun wasn't useful at all. That's when the people are actually home. In the rest of the cases... 3/4 of all robberies, the bad guy can and does steal the gun. When the person is home and can reach the gun first (2/1000)...close to half are shot by the trespasser (often by their own gun once it's taken from them).

So... hmmm... if you own a gun, you might as well be giving it to the criminals.

Reference

Oh..and before you say "Oh, it's just Wiki" - please keep in mind that this particular Wiki-article has 150 references including references from everything from the FBI to Universities and pretty much everything in between.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top