Ot: Pew Pew Pew

[Tiger]

Ahh... so you like to make your own weapon... Interesting. I only know about some rifles as shown in Futureweapons... pretty cool stuff they show... Barnett 50 caliber with accuracy to 2500 feet... Solders said bigger bullet means farther and bigger punch.

[nirvana19]

The law has come to quite a shock for a lot of people I know who live or work in the District. The city feels relatively safe in Northwest which is where I spent most of my time, but crime has always been a problem in the city. There are armed robberies all the time even in Northwest, so its frightening to think that in principle everyone can now have a gun. To be fair, in reality this (hopefully) will mainly just put guns in the hands of homeowners so they can protect themselves and their families, but the thought of even more guns is just a bit scary.

[whiskychaser]

[QUOTE=ryan roopnarine;304564]the comma-less version of that amendment appears all over the place on 1770s period correspondence and drafts. it isn't an intellectually honest place to start for gun control people. a better place would have been the psuedo-registration of militia implements (ie, private firearms that people said they would use if called up).

I would like to think your definition 'private firearms that people said they would use if called up' sums up the spirit of the law when it was written. As an outsider it seems to me that this has been hijacked. I cant say that our laws always make sense but they are national. I dont know how your joe public copes.

[healtoeit]

D.C. has had a defacto gun ban for about 25 years--IE you could have one in your home only if you had it in the city before the ban went into effect, and it had to be disassembled.

How ironic that D.C. has the one of the highest handgun related deaths of any city in the world... It was rated no. 93 (D-) out of 100 in the mens health "where men are targets" article. The article was full of **** information, however it raised an ironic point.

Outlaw guns and only the outlaws will have guns.

[healtoeit]

Damn Ryan, what kind of gun is that?

that is a lower of an AR-15 family...

[healtoeit]

As an outsider it seems to me that this has been hijacked.

I have to disagree (I am sorry if I miss read your statement).

"The prospect of tyranny may not grab the headlines the way vivid stories of gun crime routinely do. But few saw the Third Reich coming until it was too late. The Second Amendment is a doomsday provision, one designed for those exceptionally rare circumstances where all other rights have failed — where the government refuses to stand for reelection and silences those who protest; where courts have lost the courage to oppose, or can find no one to enforce their decrees. However improbable these contingencies may seem today, facing them unprepared is a mistake a free people get to make only once."
-Ninth Circuit Judge Alex Kozinski, Silveira v. Lockyer from www.fff.org

[healtoeit]

But carrying and possession are two different issues.

Good, you got that right!

I can't imagine walking around the street as if living in a western movie and I will not accept it.

You need to do some searching. Concealed carry is what you need a permit for.However, in most states you need no permit or anything to open carry... how does that make you feel? unsafe? Believe it or not the worst killing machine is not a gun, its more akin to your e34... IT'S THE CAR.

Think about this too, the people who you do not want to have guns, usually the people wanting to acquire a concealed carry permit, must go through a course and show their know how with a firearm. Some of these courses are not good enough. However most teach very well and shutting down the good courses is just as messed up as allowing the shitty ones to remain open because they fly under the radar.

[Jehu]

The 2nd amendment needs no affirmation. It is there. But carrying and possession are two different issues. I for one do not want to see restrictions against carrying firearms lifted and I don't think it will be. I can't imagine walking around the street as if living in a western movie and I will not accept it.

You've swallowed the lie.

Its like that here where I live in NH. Everyone knows most people are probably carrying or able to put their hands on a loaded gun in a pinch and we have very low crime of any type here... and its this way whereever the honest citizen's God given right to posess the means to defend himself is protected.

[attack eagle]

They upheld that DCs ban on handguns was unconstitutional, and their requirement for other weapons to either be disassembled or have a trigger lock in them was also unconstitutional.
IN short, DC's law made no sense, since it was contrary to it;s stated goal of public safety. Preventing someone from self proctection from criminals by forcing them to lreassemble a weapon, or get a key and remove a trigger lock, and then reload it or simply forcing them to use a long gun instead of the more useful single handed shortbarreled pistol was detrimental to public safety.


I think that Scalia even said that nothing was more in the public safety than the ability to hold a handgun since it left the other hand free to call 911.

Personally I don't think that other than courthouses, jails, and federal buildings where there are (or should be) numerous armed law enforcement officers immediately at hand, that people should be banned from carrying weapons.
Especially Schools. People are sitting ducks in schools. One nutjob (or two in columbine) can take out defenseless people who are confined in rooms with a single exit like fish in a barrel. Unless they are going to station an armed policeman on every floor of every building at a school, the armed guards and mini police forces are are relatively useless for protection... but the ability to carry weapons would ensure that any nut job knew that somewhere in that crowd of students, statistically there is someone that can fire back.


In Thursday's ruling, Justice Antonin Scalia, writing for four colleagues, said the Constitution does not permit "the absolute prohibition of handguns held and used for self-defense in the home." He added, however, that nothing in Thursday's ruling should "cast doubt on long-standing prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons or the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings."


Interesting fact. Black powder weapons are not considered 'firearms' or weapons under texas law... so it IS legal to cary a loaded cap n ball 45 on campus... Just have to make sure you fire it off with in a couple of days of loading.

[whiskychaser]

I have to disagree (I am sorry if I miss read your statement).

"The prospect of tyranny may not grab the headlines the way vivid stories of gun crime routinely do. But few saw the Third Reich coming until it was too late. ... [/U]"
-Ninth Circuit Judge Alex Kozinski, Silveira v. Lockyer from www.fff.org

I read Silveira v. Lockyer on the link provided but couldnt find this statement. But having read it, I can see the second amendment was written to ensure individual states retained the right to arm their own militia. If they left it to central government it probably wouldnt happen. So you would be left with a standing army controlled by central government. Well you just had a revolution to get rid of one standing army-the english-you didnt want another one in its place. I dont see how this case could be used to support an argument for an individual having guns as it says the reverse. But it did provide a fascinating insight. Many thanks