Another shooting in america

[nijinsky's fetlocks]

Too many US citizens simply hide behind the 2nd amendment to dismiss any sensible argument about gun control.

Surely terms like 'freedom','democracy' in the constitution are fairly abstract principles which can remain unchanged and stay meaningful from one decade/century to the next. The 'right to bear arms' on the other hand clearly refers to a concrete noun referring to weapons at the time. If gun-nuts want to use the constitution to defend the right to have automatic weapons, by that f****** logic surely they could also argue for the right to bear rocket-launchers or in another century maybe instantly lethal laser guns??? After all, they resemble what a gun was during the drafting as the constitution about as much as the assault rifle used in the school.

It may take a similar bout carnage on a maternity ward to have any effect.

All the more reason why every American midwife should have their own Kalashnikov.
In fact I'd go further and make sure every foetus was given an Armalite prior to mum going into labour.
The unborn need protecting.
Give every sperm a hand grenade.
God bless the NRA.

 

[SWP's back]

Too many US citizens simply hide behind the 2nd amendment to dismiss any sensible argument about gun control.

Surely terms like 'freedom','democracy' in the constitution are fairly abstract principles which can remain unchanged and stay meaningful from one decade/century to the next. The 'right to bear arms' on the other hand clearly refers to a concrete noun referring to weapons at the time. If gun-nuts want to use the constitution to defend the right to have automatic weapons, by that f****** logic surely they could also argue for the right to bear rocket-launchers or in another century maybe instantly lethal laser guns??? After all, they resemble what a gun was during the drafting as the constitution about as much as the assault rifle used in the school.

It may take a similar bout carnage on a maternity ward to have any effect.

All the more reason why every American midwife should have their own Kalashnikov.
In fact I'd go further and make sure every foetus was given an Armalite prior to mum going into labour.
The unborn need protecting.
Give every sperm a hand grenade.
God bless the NRA.

They need tanks Fetters.

Tanks is what they need.

 

[BoyBlue_1985]

Too many US citizens simply hide behind the 2nd amendment to dismiss any sensible argument about gun control.

Surely terms like 'freedom','democracy' in the constitution are fairly abstract principles which can remain unchanged and stay meaningful from one decade/century to the next. The 'right to bear arms' on the other hand clearly refers to a concrete noun referring to weapons at the time. If gun-nuts want to use the constitution to defend the right to have automatic weapons, by that f****** logic surely they could also argue for the right to bear rocket-launchers or in another century maybe instantly lethal laser guns??? After all, they resemble what a gun was during the drafting as the constitution about as much as the assault rifle used in the school.

I agree completely with this, sadly though it far too sensible an approach to be swallowed by the U.S. I can picture the faces of methed up rednecks, camouflaged anti-zionists and well-heeled arms manufacturers reeling in horror at the thought of arms controls.

Fox News will come up with a story saying "Obama to cost economy $40 billion, 20,000 jobs etc with his communist gun controls etc etc." And once the public are force fed this bullshit, the lives of these babies who were massacred will be forgotten until the next time.

I'm sure Obama wants to do what's best, he seems genuinely shattered by these events, but I don't think he'll be able to. It may take a similar bout carnage on a maternity ward to have any effect.

Unfortunately no matter what the President of the US of A's stance is he would need half the senate to agree. Half the senate is republican he cannot win

 

[nijinsky's fetlocks]

It may take a similar bout carnage on a maternity ward to have any effect.

All the more reason why every American midwife should have their own Kalashnikov.
In fact I'd go further and make sure every foetus was given an Armalite prior to mum going into labour.
The unborn need protecting.
Give every sperm a hand grenade.
God bless the NRA.

welcome back bud

Cheers mate - I'm trying for my first ever unbanned Bluemoon Christmas.
I doubt it will happen,but it's a nice thought.

 

[buckshot]

Too many US citizens simply hide behind the 2nd amendment to dismiss any sensible argument about gun control.

Surely terms like 'freedom','democracy' in the constitution are fairly abstract principles which can remain unchanged and stay meaningful from one decade/century to the next. The 'right to bear arms' on the other hand clearly refers to a concrete noun referring to weapons at the time. If gun-nuts want to use the constitution to defend the right to have automatic weapons, by that f****** logic surely they could also argue for the right to bear rocket-launchers or in another century maybe instantly lethal laser guns??? After all, they resemble what a gun was during the drafting as the constitution about as much as the assault rifle used in the school.

I agree completely with this, sadly though it far too sensible an approach to be swallowed by the U.S. I can picture the faces of methed up rednecks, camouflaged anti-zionists and well-heeled arms manufacturers reeling in horror at the thought of arms controls.

Fox News will come up with a story saying "Obama to cost economy $40 billion, 20,000 jobs etc with his communist gun controls etc etc." And once the public are force fed this bullshit, the lives of these babies who were massacred will be forgotten until the next time.

I'm sure Obama wants to do what's best, he seems genuinely shattered by these events, but I don't think he'll be able to. It may take a similar bout carnage on a maternity ward to have any effect.

Unfortunately no matter what the President of the US of A's stance is he would need half the senate to agree. Half the senate is republican he cannot win

Actually he has a 55-45 majority in the senate but the republicans automatically filibuster and bill that the president supports. During the Bush years a 51-49 majority was all it took to pass a law but the rules have changed since Blacky McBlackerson was elected. (Sorry to bring race into this but it really disgusts me how they show him no respect)

 

[BoyBlue_1985]

I agree completely with this, sadly though it far too sensible an approach to be swallowed by the U.S. I can picture the faces of methed up rednecks, camouflaged anti-zionists and well-heeled arms manufacturers reeling in horror at the thought of arms controls.

Fox News will come up with a story saying "Obama to cost economy $40 billion, 20,000 jobs etc with his communist gun controls etc etc." And once the public are force fed this bullshit, the lives of these babies who were massacred will be forgotten until the next time.

I'm sure Obama wants to do what's best, he seems genuinely shattered by these events, but I don't think he'll be able to. It may take a similar bout carnage on a maternity ward to have any effect.

Unfortunately no matter what the President of the US of A's stance is he would need half the senate to agree. Half the senate is republican he cannot win

Actually he has a 55-45 majority in the senate but the republicans automatically filibuster and bill that the president supports. During the Bush years a 51-49 majority was all it took to pass a law but the rules have changed since Blacky McBlackerson was elected. (Sorry to bring race into this but it really disgusts me how they show him no respect)

Don't forget though even some Democrats believe in the right to shoot unarmed people who you dont like much

 

[Kazzydeyna]

I haven't read this whole thread but I guarantee there'll be at least a couple of headcases on here defending the right to bear arms.

To them I say this:

Imagine the NEXT atrocity. There WILL be one. Next week,next month, next year.
Then imagine the next perpetrator of this atrocity. He will be a man. He will almost certainly be white. He will almost certainly be a Christian.

Now I ask you only this. Why, in the name of all that is holy, are you here, today, defending this bastard's "right" to buy, own and use the assault weapons/handguns that he will use to kill people. ?

Why?

Why?

Why?

 

[nijinsky's fetlocks]

I haven't read this whole thread but I guarantee there'll be at least a couple of headcases on here defending the right to bear arms.

To them I say this:

Imagine the NEXT atrocity. There WILL be one. Next week,next month, next year.
Then imagine the next perpetrator of this atrocity. He will be a man. He will almost certainly be white. He will almost certainly be a Christian.

Now I ask you only this. Why, in the name of all that is holy, are you here, today, defending this bastard's "right" to buy, own and use the assault weapons/handguns that he will use to kill people. ?

Why?

Why?

Why?

Delilah?
Americans obviously need guns to protect them from other people who have guns.

 

[BoyBlue_1985]

I haven't read this whole thread but I guarantee there'll be at least a couple of headcases on here defending the right to bear arms.

To them I say this:

Imagine the NEXT atrocity. There WILL be one. Next week,next month, next year.
Then imagine the next perpetrator of this atrocity. He will be a man. He will almost certainly be white. He will almost certainly be a Christian.

Now I ask you only this. Why, in the name of all that is holy, are you here, today, defending this bastard's "right" to buy, own and use the assault weapons/handguns that he will use to kill people. ?

Why?

Why?

Why?

Delilah?
Americans obviously need guns to protect them from other people who have guns.

Just reading up on US gun laws some have been passed in the past and New York and California are quite strict but they have a clause. No law change if you owned the gun before the date the law was passed or even manufactured before. Although New York is almost about as gun free as you can get in the US (100 guns to every 1 person)

 

[buckshot]

Unfortunately no matter what the President of the US of A's stance is he would need half the senate to agree. Half the senate is republican he cannot win

Actually he has a 55-45 majority in the senate but the republicans automatically filibuster and bill that the president supports. During the Bush years a 51-49 majority was all it took to pass a law but the rules have changed since Blacky McBlackerson was elected. (Sorry to bring race into this but it really disgusts me how they show him no respect)

Don't forget though even some Democrats believe in the right to shoot unarmed people who you dont like much

Like I've said before, I come from a family of gun owners and support the right to own certain types of guns. I don't own any myself but guns for hunting rarely are used in situations like this. My problem is solely with the assualt weapons that have little or no use other than going on killing sprees. So while most democrats are in favor of the right to own firearms they temper that with common sense.