Des Moines columnist calls for repeal of Second Amendment, death of gun owners - Polidicks

[QUOTE=faze;39067133]The second amendment allows me to own guns, thus having some protection against murderous nutjobs. If the second amendment were to be repealed, criminals would obviously not listen to it and it would leave law abiding citizens unarmed and defenseless against armed criminals. Get it now?[/QUOTE] Where did I say repealed? At least you half admitted. That's a start.

[QUOTE=NoDachi;39066868]Just stop pretending that the 2nd amendment makes you safer. Then time and history will do the rest.[/QUOTE] How does an armed citizen not make them safer (assuming they store their weapons properly and practice proper safety)

[QUOTE=NoDachi;39067142]Where did I say repealed? At least you half admitted. That's a start.[/QUOTE] Admitted to what? I confirmed my belief in the second amendment. You still have yet to say what you would propose to do.

[QUOTE=faze;39067186]Admitted to what?[/QUOTE] You recognised the problem with firearms have scared you into owning one yourself for protection. [QUOTE=faze;39067186]You still have yet to say what you would propose to do.[/QUOTE] Where is this coming from?

can't understand the logic behind banning guns, I mean I guess it's to prevent innocent deaths? I'm sure there is more people dying due to drunk drivers and 2nd hand smoke than guns, why do they not try to ban alcohol and smokes first? not that I approve banning anything, just making a point

[QUOTE=DarkSiper;39067249]can't understand the logic behind banning guns, I mean I guess it's to prevent innocent deaths? I'm sure there is more people dying due to drunk drivers and 2nd hand smoke than guns, why do they not try to ban alcohol and smokes first? not that I approve banning anything, just making a point[/QUOTE] Smoking being phased out over time because of obviousness and awareness. And deaths caused by drunk driving is just over half of firearm deaths in the US.

[QUOTE=NoDachi;39067222]You recognised the problem with firearms have scared you into owning one yourself for protection. [/QUOTE] Well I have several because I enjoy shooting. Better to have them and not need them than to not have them when needed. As far as what you propose to do, you seem pretty anti-second amendment. I'd like to hear your ideas.

[QUOTE=faze;39067298]As far as what you propose to do, you seem pretty anti-second amendment. I'd like to hear your ideas.[/QUOTE] But isn't that like saying you can't be critical of the obvious problems associated with capitalism without devising your own economic doctrine.

[QUOTE=NoDachi;39067319]But isn't that like saying you can't be critical of the obvious problems associated with capitalism without devising your own economic doctrine.[/QUOTE] Not really. I was just asking how you would construct this situation differently.

[QUOTE=faze;39067326]Not really. I was just asking how you would construct this situation differently.[/QUOTE] Construct? as in from the beginning?

[QUOTE=NoDachi;39067332]Construct? as in from the beginning?[/QUOTE] No, fix the current issues.

[QUOTE=faze;39067339]No, fix the current issues.[/QUOTE] You can't. Not with anything dramatic and overnight. Its one of the biggest fuckups in modern american society. I liked what this guy said on it: [url]http://www.economist.com/blogs/lexington/2012/12/gun-control?zid=312&ah=da4ed4425e74339883d473adf5773841[/url] Read it all, not just the title.

[QUOTE=NoDachi;39067380]You can't. Not with anything dramatic and overnight. Its one of the biggest fuckups in modern american society. I liked what this guy said on it: [url]http://www.economist.com/blogs/lexington/2012/12/gun-control?zid=312&ah=da4ed4425e74339883d473adf5773841[/url] Read it all, not just the title.[/QUOTE] You think guns/second amendment are nothing but a fuckup?

[QUOTE=cecilbdemodded;39058672]You might as well suggest a community control of free speech and religion while you're at it. [/QUOTE] We already have that, it's called Obscenity laws. [editline]2nd January 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=faze;39066309]Because criminals don't obey laws, and have guns illegally. The second amendments says I am legally allowed to own a weapon to protect myself against them.[/QUOTE] No it fucking doesn't, it simply says you have the right to possess and carry them. NOW, in Texas however, self defense is a constitutional right. [editline]2nd January 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=NoDachi;39067222]You recognised the problem with firearms have scared you into owning one yourself for protection. Where is this coming from?[/QUOTE] I own a .44 magnum revolver because I was robbed at gun point and the police after failing to catch the fucker told me to shoot them as they are running off next time. [editline]2nd January 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=NoDachi;39066667]But undoubtedly a lot less.[/QUOTE] I rather get shot than stabbed.

[QUOTE=Broseph_;39068382]I own a .44 magnum revolver because I was robbed at gun point and the police after failing to catch the fucker told me to shoot them as they are running off next time.[/QUOTE] But would you actually shoot someone in the back over property? [QUOTE=Broseph_;39068382]I rather get shot than stabbed.[/QUOTE] Why?

[QUOTE=Broseph_;39068382] No it fucking doesn't, it simply says you have the right to possess and carry them. [/QUOTE] Seems like the same thing to me. [editline]2nd January 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=NoDachi;39068477]But would you actually shoot someone in the back over property?[/QUOTE] Plenty of robbers have a heavy or itchy trigger finger. If someone is holding a gun to me, I don't know their intentions. If someone is holding me at gunpoint, I interpret that as they want to kill me. I would shoot them over my life, not property.

"told me to shoot them as they are running off next time." That is why he said he owns his handgun. Now Faze, as a responsible gunowner how does that justification sit with you?

[QUOTE=NoDachi;39068567]"told me to shoot them as they are running off next time." That is why he said he owns his handgun. Now Faze, as a responsible gunowner how does that justification sit with you?[/QUOTE] Shooting somebody in the back is murder, usually. One case where it wouldn't be murder is if I'm asleep on the couch and an armed robber runs up the stairs towards my kid's room after I yell at him that I'm armed. If I fire and hit him in the back, it's his fault.

[QUOTE=Ybbats;39057512]I'm being robbed at gunpoint! Better get to the community center and fill out the forms required to get my gun, and quick! Brb, mister robber.[/QUOTE] Oh look you're being robbed at gunpoint. Oh look you've just been robbed at gunpoint because your hidden carry gun is still in some pouch which you can't pull out in time since the guy is in front of you with a gun. Basically when looking at the second amendment you get a much different question on what is the purpose of the second amendment. And the mention of the well regulated militia is actually quite interesting. And you have to essentially weigh on what you have to do to allow such a well regulated militia to exist and within what limits. You could have mandated gun training and communually owned weapons, similar to how civilian firefighters operate for instance and still manage to maintain such a well regulated militia. It really depends on what half of the amendment is the more important one. [QUOTE=faze;39066703]You do realize you can make pretty large explosive devices from things found in most homes...[/QUOTE] Yes and very often such an explosive device is set in such a way that the perp can't be stopped as he won't be around when it goes off or he has it on a deadman's. Guns really don't help you there.

[QUOTE=NoDachi;39068477]But would you actually shoot someone in the back over property? Why?[/QUOTE] If the cops actually told him to shoot someone in the back, they were condoning illegal action. Even if you shoot someone who's about to cut your throat, you need to be able to prove that's what happened. Your attacker had better not have bullet wounds in his back. I'm willing to bet nobody here would actually shoot someone over property, but they [i]would[/i] shoot someone who was actively threatening to kill them. If you pull a weapon on somebody, you've lost your right to complain if you get hurt.

[QUOTE=faze;39068585]Shooting somebody in the back is murder, usually.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=Broseph_;39068382]I own a .44 magnum revolver because I was robbed at [b]gun point[/b] and the police after failing to catch the fucker told me to shoot them as they are running off next time.[/QUOTE] If that man has your wallet [i]and[/i] a gun, that will be counted as self defense in most cases. Whose word are they going to trust? The man who shot the thief, or the now dead criminal?

[QUOTE=Kartoffel;39069489]If that man has your wallet [i]and[/i] a gun, that will be counted as self defense in most cases. Whose word are they going to trust? The man who shot the thief, or the now dead criminal?[/QUOTE] Here in Maryland, the court sides with the criminal pretty frequently.

[QUOTE=faze;39069536]Here in Maryland, the court sides with the criminal pretty frequently.[/QUOTE] Well, that's Maryland for you. Since Broseph's in Texas, he probably wouldn't get arrested for murder.

[QUOTE=Kartoffel;39069644]Well, that's Maryland for you. Since Broseph's in Texas, he probably wouldn't get arrested for murder.[/QUOTE] Yeah here in MD I can't even carry. What kinda shit is that?

[QUOTE=Kartoffel;39069489]If that man has your wallet [i]and[/i] a gun, that will be counted as self defense in most cases. Whose word are they going to trust? The man who shot the thief, or the now dead criminal?[/QUOTE] Yeah, and have fun explaining the crime scene. Generally speaking in a situation like this, you will get a lowered sentence but it will also generally be considered use of unreasonable force.

[QUOTE=wraithcat;39070344]Yeah, and have fun explaining the crime scene. Generally speaking in a situation like this, you will get a lowered sentence but it will also generally be considered use of unreasonable force.[/QUOTE] Yup. Look what happened to George Zimmerman. Huge gashes on his head and witnesses on Zimmerman's side and his life is still ruined.