Get over it: Americans are allowed to have guns!

Discuss politics and current affairs here.

Hot topic: The scourge of negative gearing, Friends of the NBN and wrecking lives.  The economy and Poll tracking— all the polls.

Special Feature 1: Peter Costello and our current deficits.
Special Feature 2: Dr Turnbull and the wrong NBN prescription
Special Feature 3: The Denigration of science, technology and education.
.
Forum rules
The rules for this board are in the Charter of Moderation. Politics is for serious discussion of politics, economics and current affairs.

Re: Get over it: Americans are allowed to have guns!

Postby SethBullock » 07 Jul 2019, 14:13

Texan wrote:
What is the assigned function of these teachers. Do they secre their classroom? The entire wing? Do they cooperate with the police in the chase? If they are to only secure their classroom it will be hard to screw up. Protecting the kids is the same thing as protecting themselves.


Good point.

Aussie wrote:Over Heston's cold dead hands. Nah. One day Team USA will get it. One day.

A Teacher's function is to teach. It is the function of Government to protect kids at School and that cannot be contracted out to Teachers.


Expecting the police to protect students is unrealistic, Aussie. There simply are not enough police to do that.

In my community of about 30,000, the police department employs 35 full time officers. There are 8 public schools, 2 private schools, and 2 college campuses in the community. There is one police officer assigned full time to the schools. How is he going to protect 12 schools at once?
"At least he's not Hillary" - Hatty

"There's only one solution: MORE guns!" - greggerypeccary

... "mr know it all" - Bongalong
User avatar
SethBullock
Jaguar
 
Posts: 2235
Joined: 22 Oct 2018, 12:37
Location: Oregon, USA
spamone: Animal

Re: Get over it: Americans are allowed to have guns!

Postby Texan » 07 Jul 2019, 14:42

Aussie wrote:
Texan wrote:
Aussie wrote: It is the function of Government to protect kids at School and that cannot be contracted out to Teachers.

We’ve already decided in court that police cannot be held responsible for failing to protect you. You depend on them if you like. I won’t. Police will show up after the crime to gather info and catch the criminal after the crime. That’s not protection. Arming teachers works everywhere it’s tried.


We are not discussing Police. We are discussing the duty of care owed by an armed Teacher to students.

But an armed teacher takes on an official capacity as a police officer if the need arises. In Texas, the trained and armed teachers are called School Marshals. They even train with the police in their off hours. They can respond instantly, unlike that officer in Florida who was too scared to engage. A school Marshal is forced to immediately engage the suspect or secure the students in his area, depending on his assignment.
Texan
Cheetah
 
Posts: 1185
Joined: 21 Oct 2018, 13:38
spamone: Animal

Re: Get over it: Americans are allowed to have guns!

Postby Aussie » 07 Jul 2019, 15:09

SethBullock wrote:
Texan wrote:
What is the assigned function of these teachers. Do they secre their classroom? The entire wing? Do they cooperate with the police in the chase? If they are to only secure their classroom it will be hard to screw up. Protecting the kids is the same thing as protecting themselves.


Good point.

Aussie wrote:Over Heston's cold dead hands. Nah. One day Team USA will get it. One day.

A Teacher's function is to teach. It is the function of Government to protect kids at School and that cannot be contracted out to Teachers.


Expecting the police to protect students is unrealistic, Aussie. There simply are not enough police to do that.

In my community of about 30,000, the police department employs 35 full time officers. There are 8 public schools, 2 private schools, and 2 college campuses in the community. There is one police officer assigned full time to the schools. How is he going to protect 12 schools at once?


Yer looking at the problem from the wrong end. Just get rid of the guns.....which are the problem.
User avatar
Aussie
Minister for Foreign Affairs
 
Posts: 8863
Joined: 13 Mar 2010, 17:25

Re: Get over it: Americans are allowed to have guns!

Postby Aussie » 07 Jul 2019, 15:11

Texan wrote:
Aussie wrote:
Texan wrote:
Aussie wrote: It is the function of Government to protect kids at School and that cannot be contracted out to Teachers.

We’ve already decided in court that police cannot be held responsible for failing to protect you. You depend on them if you like. I won’t. Police will show up after the crime to gather info and catch the criminal after the crime. That’s not protection. Arming teachers works everywhere it’s tried.


We are not discussing Police. We are discussing the duty of care owed by an armed Teacher to students.

But an armed teacher takes on an official capacity as a police officer if the need arises. In Texas, the trained and armed teachers are called School Marshals. They even train with the police in their off hours. They can respond instantly, unlike that officer in Florida who was too scared to engage. A school Marshal is forced to immediately engage the suspect or secure the students in his area, depending on his assignment.


I have not seen a link to what official status and protections these armed Teachers will have. In the absence of that, from where I sit, I can see a Teacher, voluntarily armed, who cowers in the face of an attack on students in their immediate care, being sued for deaths and woundings.
User avatar
Aussie
Minister for Foreign Affairs
 
Posts: 8863
Joined: 13 Mar 2010, 17:25

Re: Get over it: Americans are allowed to have guns!

Postby SethBullock » 07 Jul 2019, 15:37

Aussie wrote:
Texan wrote:
Aussie wrote:
Texan wrote:
Aussie wrote: It is the function of Government to protect kids at School and that cannot be contracted out to Teachers.

We’ve already decided in court that police cannot be held responsible for failing to protect you. You depend on them if you like. I won’t. Police will show up after the crime to gather info and catch the criminal after the crime. That’s not protection. Arming teachers works everywhere it’s tried.


We are not discussing Police. We are discussing the duty of care owed by an armed Teacher to students.

But an armed teacher takes on an official capacity as a police officer if the need arises. In Texas, the trained and armed teachers are called School Marshals. They even train with the police in their off hours. They can respond instantly, unlike that officer in Florida who was too scared to engage. A school Marshal is forced to immediately engage the suspect or secure the students in his area, depending on his assignment.


I have not seen a link to what official status and protections these armed Teachers will have. In the absence of that, from where I sit, I can see a Teacher, voluntarily armed, who cowers in the face of an attack on students in their immediate care, being sued for deaths and woundings.


Aussie, somewhere on this site I told about the two "shoot commands" I gave myself in the line of duty. I can tell you with absolute certainty that in those moments the LAST thing I was worried about was being sued afterwards. The survival instinct kicks in, Aussie. And that instinct overrules everything.

Aussie, if you or your loved ones, or children under your care, were about to be killed by a criminal, and you had a gun, you would use it. You would. Trust me. You'd use it.
"At least he's not Hillary" - Hatty

"There's only one solution: MORE guns!" - greggerypeccary

... "mr know it all" - Bongalong
User avatar
SethBullock
Jaguar
 
Posts: 2235
Joined: 22 Oct 2018, 12:37
Location: Oregon, USA
spamone: Animal

Re: Get over it: Americans are allowed to have guns!

Postby Aussie » 07 Jul 2019, 15:55

You are right, I likely would. But....I'd never have one in the first place.

I am not fearful that my grandkids will be mown down at School by some dick with an assault rifle, or any other gun. There are 'no' guns...unlike the USA where every dick has one, or can buy one as easy as they can buy a can of coke.
User avatar
Aussie
Minister for Foreign Affairs
 
Posts: 8863
Joined: 13 Mar 2010, 17:25

Re: Get over it: Americans are allowed to have guns!

Postby Bongalong » 07 Jul 2019, 16:26

Texan wrote:
Aussie wrote:
Texan wrote:
Aussie wrote: It is the function of Government to protect kids at School and that cannot be contracted out to Teachers.

We’ve already decided in court that police cannot be held responsible for failing to protect you. You depend on them if you like. I won’t. Police will show up after the crime to gather info and catch the criminal after the crime. That’s not protection. Arming teachers works everywhere it’s tried.


We are not discussing Police. We are discussing the duty of care owed by an armed Teacher to students.

But an armed teacher takes on an official capacity as a police officer if the need arises. In Texas, the trained and armed teachers are called School Marshals. They even train with the police in their off hours. They can respond instantly, unlike that officer in Florida who was too scared to engage. A school Marshal is forced to immediately engage the suspect or secure the students in his area, depending on his assignment.

It's called 'passing the buck" ,..or 'kicking the can down the road'.

Aussie has a valid point. It's not a teachers responsibility.
"Oi!"
Bongalong
Warthog
 
Posts: 3203
Joined: 25 Jun 2018, 11:48
spamone: Animal

Re: Get over it: Americans are allowed to have guns!

Postby Bongalong » 07 Jul 2019, 16:38

Texan wrote:
Aussie wrote:"Guardian Programme." Yeas. I'd rename that "Come in Spinners Programme."

Any Numpty Teacher who takes this up and FAILS to protect kids will be in the hot seat with outraged fingers pointing and people screaming "Why didn't you save our kids??? I'm gonna sue your arse off."

Stupid.

"Stop the Guns. Get rid of the 2nd and the NRA."

:grn

Come and take them.


What is the assigned function of these teachers. Do they secre their classroom? The entire wing? Do they cooperate with the police in the chase? If they are to only secure their classroom it will be hard to screw up. Protecting the kids is the same thing as protecting themselves.

Are you trying to say that teachers in America should be assigned the protection of their students even under attack from psychopathic class mates with guns? Um, if you start telling them that they will start demanding more money.... :rofl
"Oi!"
Bongalong
Warthog
 
Posts: 3203
Joined: 25 Jun 2018, 11:48
spamone: Animal

Re: Get over it: Americans are allowed to have guns!

Postby Chuck » 07 Jul 2019, 21:10

SethBullock wrote:Third sentence: Keep in mind that our federal government was set up in such a way that it obligates our government to protect our individual constitutional rights. And our government is supposed to be accountable to us, not just the other way around.


Wasn’t the constitution written when the country had no army or police force but simply groups of militias roaming around the country side.
It was during these times that individuals needed some form of weapons for protection - muskets were singles shot, not automatic weapons.

So removing automatic weapons from the shelves wouldn’t contravene the constitution!

I can’t understand why Americans are adamant about the 'right to bear arms', shouldn’t the priority be earning a decent wage that people can live on?

How can a country be classified as being wealthy when its workforce relies on 'condoned begging', tips to make a living?

I would find it deeming, hinting people to leave a tip!
Unfortunately this filthy habit is making its way into our country!

Chuck
Chuck
Pitbull terrier
 
Posts: 369
Joined: 11 May 2019, 18:39
spamone: Animal

Re: Get over it: Americans are allowed to have guns!

Postby SethBullock » 07 Jul 2019, 22:11

Chuck wrote:
SethBullock wrote:Third sentence: Keep in mind that our federal government was set up in such a way that it obligates our government to protect our individual constitutional rights. And our government is supposed to be accountable to us, not just the other way around.


Wasn’t the constitution written when the country had no army or police force but simply groups of militias roaming around the country side.
It was during these times that individuals needed some form of weapons for protection - muskets were singles shot, not automatic weapons.

So removing automatic weapons from the shelves wouldn’t contravene the constitution!


The Constitution just refers to the "right of the people to keep and bear arms", not how they work or are constructed. The Constitution also guarantees the freedom of the press. There was no radio, TV, or internet in those days. The press expressed itself using words printed on paper. But that doesn't mean that the freedom of the press is limited to words printed onto paper.

Chuck wrote:I can’t understand why Americans are adamant about the 'right to bear arms', shouldn’t the priority be earning a decent wage that people can live on?


Those are two separate, unrelated topics.

How can a country be classified as being wealthy when its workforce relies on 'condoned begging', tips to make a living?

I would find it deeming, hinting people to leave a tip!
Unfortunately this filthy habit is making its way into our country!

Chuck


"Filthy habit", lol ...

I like the custom. I like directly rewarding a server for good service and good food. In many restaurants, the tips are shared with the cooks as well. Tipping insures that the server is really invested in your satisfaction. Consequently, they hustle, they're engaging and friendly, and they want you to get good food. If they give you poor service, there is no tip at the end. When my daughter was a server, she made over twice the minimum wage with the tips counted in.
"At least he's not Hillary" - Hatty

"There's only one solution: MORE guns!" - greggerypeccary

... "mr know it all" - Bongalong
User avatar
SethBullock
Jaguar
 
Posts: 2235
Joined: 22 Oct 2018, 12:37
Location: Oregon, USA
spamone: Animal

Re: Get over it: Americans are allowed to have guns!

Postby Chuck » 07 Jul 2019, 22:50

SethBullock wrote:
Chuck wrote:
SethBullock wrote:Third sentence: Keep in mind that our federal government was set up in such a way that it obligates our government to protect our individual constitutional rights. And our government is supposed to be accountable to us, not just the other way around.


Wasn’t the constitution written when the country had no army or police force but simply groups of militias roaming around the country side.
It was during these times that individuals needed some form of weapons for protection - muskets were singles shot, not automatic weapons.

So removing automatic weapons from the shelves wouldn’t contravene the constitution!


The Constitution just refers to the "right of the people to keep and bear arms", not how they work or are constructed. The Constitution also guarantees the freedom of the press. There was no radio, TV, or internet in those days. The press expressed itself using words printed on paper. But that doesn't mean that the freedom of the press is limited to words printed onto paper.

Chuck wrote:I can’t understand why Americans are adamant about the 'right to bear arms', shouldn’t the priority be earning a decent wage that people can live on?

)
Those are two separate, unrelated topics.

How can a country be classified as being wealthy when its workforce relies on 'condoned begging', tips to make a living?

I would find it deeming, hinting people to leave a tip!
Unfortunately this filthy habit is making its way into our country!

Chuck


"Filthy habit", lol ...

I like the custom. I like directly rewarding a server for good service and good food. In many restaurants, the tips are shared with the cooks as well. Tipping insures that the server is really invested in your satisfaction. Consequently, they hustle, they're engaging and friendly, and they want you to get good food. If they give you poor service, there is no tip at the end. When my daughter was a server, she made over twice the minimum wage with the tips counted in.


I think that the American people have taken a bit of liberty in the extrapolating the intent of their forefathers.

The constitutional component about the right to bear arms has nothing to do with future weapons, it was written due to circumstances at that time when no army or police force existed.

Under ur constitution u would still have the right to own a single shot rife. Therefore, their is no need for military style automatic weapons and still adhere to ur rights under ur constitution.

Chuck
Chuck
Pitbull terrier
 
Posts: 369
Joined: 11 May 2019, 18:39
spamone: Animal

Re: Get over it: Americans are allowed to have guns!

Postby pinkeye » 07 Jul 2019, 22:59

ahh but the pro-gun lobby cannot accept that.

Just imagine the unemployment..!!
sleeping is good for you
User avatar
pinkeye
Warthog
 
Posts: 4156
Joined: 01 Oct 2017, 20:59
spamone: Animal

Re: Get over it: Americans are allowed to have guns!

Postby SethBullock » 07 Jul 2019, 23:18

Chuck wrote:
SethBullock wrote:
Chuck wrote:
SethBullock wrote:Third sentence: Keep in mind that our federal government was set up in such a way that it obligates our government to protect our individual constitutional rights. And our government is supposed to be accountable to us, not just the other way around.


Wasn’t the constitution written when the country had no army or police force but simply groups of militias roaming around the country side.
It was during these times that individuals needed some form of weapons for protection - muskets were singles shot, not automatic weapons.

So removing automatic weapons from the shelves wouldn’t contravene the constitution!


The Constitution just refers to the "right of the people to keep and bear arms", not how they work or are constructed. The Constitution also guarantees the freedom of the press. There was no radio, TV, or internet in those days. The press expressed itself using words printed on paper. But that doesn't mean that the freedom of the press is limited to words printed onto paper.

Chuck wrote:I can’t understand why Americans are adamant about the 'right to bear arms', shouldn’t the priority be earning a decent wage that people can live on?

)
Those are two separate, unrelated topics.

How can a country be classified as being wealthy when its workforce relies on 'condoned begging', tips to make a living?

I would find it deeming, hinting people to leave a tip!
Unfortunately this filthy habit is making its way into our country!

Chuck


"Filthy habit", lol ...

I like the custom. I like directly rewarding a server for good service and good food. In many restaurants, the tips are shared with the cooks as well. Tipping insures that the server is really invested in your satisfaction. Consequently, they hustle, they're engaging and friendly, and they want you to get good food. If they give you poor service, there is no tip at the end. When my daughter was a server, she made over twice the minimum wage with the tips counted in.


I think that the American people have taken a bit of liberty in the extrapolating the intent of their forefathers.

The constitutional component about the right to bear arms has nothing to do with future weapons, it was written due to circumstances at that time when no army or police force existed.

Under ur constitution u would still have the right to own a single shot rife. Therefore, their is no need for military style automatic weapons and still adhere to ur rights under ur constitution.

Chuck


Chuck, by that same logic, the freedom of speech could be limited to oral speech or posting a handwritten opinion on a piece of paper in the town square. The freedom of the press would only apply to what they could print on actual paper, not any form of electronic transmission. So the argument you're making just doesn't stand up to logic. And, the Constitution grants these basic freedoms without regard for changing technology.

So in reality, the only way multi-shot firearms could be banned would be to pass a constitutional amendment repealing the 2nd Amendment first. This would require votes in both the House and Senate wherein the amendment passed by at least a 2/3's majority. Then the amendment would have to ratified by 3/4's of the states. Frankly, the chances of that happening in the foreseeable future are nil.
"At least he's not Hillary" - Hatty

"There's only one solution: MORE guns!" - greggerypeccary

... "mr know it all" - Bongalong
User avatar
SethBullock
Jaguar
 
Posts: 2235
Joined: 22 Oct 2018, 12:37
Location: Oregon, USA
spamone: Animal

Re: Get over it: Americans are allowed to have guns!

Postby SethBullock » 08 Jul 2019, 00:02

Chuck wrote:Wasn’t the constitution written when the country had no army or police force ...


And a point about this ...

Generally speaking, a criminal does not commit a murder, rape, robbery, kidnapping or assault when the police are around. They commit these crimes when, from a practical standpoint, there is no police force. The right to possess firearms dispossesses the criminal from the advantage of the fact that there are no police present.

If the private ownership of firearms was banned, the police would be able to possess and use firearms for their protection, but law-abiding citizens would not to able to. That will never fly in this country. In the U.S., law-abiding citizens are granted a measure of personal sovereignty over the security of their persons and homes. This means that they may protect their lives, their homes and families, and even innocent third parties, at the moment of crisis, when there are no police around to protect them, using lethal force with a firearm if necessary. This right is, of course, subject to all applicable laws that govern the justifiable use of force.

And finally, if we ban firearms, we may as well ban camping and backpacking. We should close all of our national forests and wilderness areas to recreational uses. Because out there, an unarmed human is not at the top of the food chain. An unarmed human is prey. That's no joke.

This cat is estimated to be well over 200 lbs. The photo was taken in my state by a friend of mine. The cougar is standing over a dead adult cow elk. If you know how large an adult elk is, then you can appreciate the size of this brute standing over it.

cougar 3.JPG
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Last edited by SethBullock on 08 Jul 2019, 00:20, edited 1 time in total.
"At least he's not Hillary" - Hatty

"There's only one solution: MORE guns!" - greggerypeccary

... "mr know it all" - Bongalong
User avatar
SethBullock
Jaguar
 
Posts: 2235
Joined: 22 Oct 2018, 12:37
Location: Oregon, USA
spamone: Animal

Re: Get over it: Americans are allowed to have guns!

Postby SethBullock » 08 Jul 2019, 00:18

Bongalong wrote:Are you trying to say that teachers in America should be assigned the protection of their students even under attack from psychopathic class mates with guns? Um, if you start telling them that they will start demanding more money.... :rofl


Teachers have proven time and again that they will try to protect their students in a crisis.

I'll bet you a six pack of Deschutes beers that your dear friend Hatty would do everything in his power to protect his students under his care in a crisis. That crisis could be a fire or earthquake. It could be someone trying to kidnap one of his students. Or it could be someone trying to kill with a knife or a gun. Yes, your best friend forever, Hatty, would do anything in his power to protect them. He would even use lethal force - just like Aussie would - if there was no alternative and if he had the means.

So, given that the will to protect is already present, why would we instead choose to enforce helplessness? That makes no sense to me.
"At least he's not Hillary" - Hatty

"There's only one solution: MORE guns!" - greggerypeccary

... "mr know it all" - Bongalong
User avatar
SethBullock
Jaguar
 
Posts: 2235
Joined: 22 Oct 2018, 12:37
Location: Oregon, USA
spamone: Animal

Re: Get over it: Americans are allowed to have guns!

Postby Chuck » 08 Jul 2019, 10:24

SethBullock wrote:
Chuck wrote:Wasn’t the constitution written when the country had no army or police force ...


And a point about this ...

Generally speaking, a criminal does not commit a murder, rape, robbery, kidnapping or assault when the police are around. They commit these crimes when, from a practical standpoint, there is no police force. The right to possess firearms dispossesses the criminal from the advantage of the fact that there are no police present.

If the private ownership of firearms was banned, the police would be able to possess and use firearms for their protection, but law-abiding citizens would not to able to. That will never fly in this country. In the U.S., law-abiding citizens are granted a measure of personal sovereignty over the security of their persons and homes. This means that they may protect their lives, their homes and families, and even innocent third parties, at the moment of crisis, when there are no police around to protect them, using lethal force with a firearm if necessary. This right is, of course, subject to all applicable laws that govern the justifiable use of force.

And finally, if we ban firearms, we may as well ban camping and backpacking. We should close all of our national forests and wilderness areas to recreational uses. Because out there, an unarmed human is not at the top of the food chain. An unarmed human is prey. That's no joke.

This cat is estimated to be well over 200 lbs. The photo was taken in my state by a friend of mine. The cougar is standing over a dead adult cow elk. If you know how large an adult elk is, then you can appreciate the size of this brute standing over it.

cougar 3.JPG


Most of ur responses is going off the topic - like u mentioned about me waffling on, about tipping.

I’ve never mentioned banning fire arms, but simply restricting the type available to the general public.

There are many countries that allow their citizens to be in possession of firearms but the USA has the dubious reputation of
being a murderous country amongst the develop world.

Chuck
Chuck
Pitbull terrier
 
Posts: 369
Joined: 11 May 2019, 18:39
spamone: Animal

Re: Get over it: Americans are allowed to have guns!

Postby Bongalong » 08 Jul 2019, 12:17

SethBullock wrote:
Chuck wrote:Wasn’t the constitution written when the country had no army or police force ...


And a point about this ...

Generally speaking, a criminal does not commit a murder, rape, robbery, kidnapping or assault when the police are around. They commit these crimes when, from a practical standpoint, there is no police force. The right to possess firearms dispossesses the criminal from the advantage of the fact that there are no police present.

If the private ownership of firearms was banned, the police would be able to possess and use firearms for their protection, but law-abiding citizens would not to able to. That will never fly in this country. In the U.S., law-abiding citizens are granted a measure of personal sovereignty over the security of their persons and homes. This means that they may protect their lives, their homes and families, and even innocent third parties, at the moment of crisis, when there are no police around to protect them, using lethal force with a firearm if necessary. This right is, of course, subject to all applicable laws that govern the justifiable use of force.

And finally, if we ban firearms, we may as well ban camping and backpacking. We should close all of our national forests and wilderness areas to recreational uses. Because out there, an unarmed human is not at the top of the food chain. An unarmed human is prey. That's no joke.

This cat is estimated to be well over 200 lbs. The photo was taken in my state by a friend of mine. The cougar is standing over a dead adult cow elk. If you know how large an adult elk is, then you can appreciate the size of this brute standing over it.


cougar 3.JPG


Nietzsche esteemed few philosophers, but he esteemed Spinoza. ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baruch_Spinoza#Spinoza's_reception_in_the_19th_and_20th_centuries)

"Man in his natural state will verge on the side of cruelty because he is living amongst the animals who have an advantage in speed and weapons." (Spinoza, my paraphrased recollection of his 'POLITICAL-THEOLOGIA') He then goes on to to say why the idea of some kind of dominion comes into play whereby the common person can enjoy the protection of said dominion and that leads to two classes: the higher species and the inferior species as,... once again is my recollection and/or interpretation of, Nietszche putting as his direct allusion/reference to SPINOZA- thereby affording him the rare credit the first quote talks about!

~ something like that :Hi :bgrin :bgrin :bgrin :bgrin :bgrin :bike :bike :rain :yak yak :rain :rain :rain :rain :roll

:beer
Last edited by Bongalong on 08 Jul 2019, 12:28, edited 1 time in total.
"Oi!"
Bongalong
Warthog
 
Posts: 3203
Joined: 25 Jun 2018, 11:48
spamone: Animal

Get over it: Americans have the RIGHT to guns!

Postby DreamRyderX » 08 Jul 2019, 12:26

Chuck wrote:
SethBullock wrote:
Chuck wrote:Wasn’t the constitution written when the country had no army or police force ...


And a point about this ...

Generally speaking, a criminal does not commit a murder, rape, robbery, kidnapping or assault when the police are around. They commit these crimes when, from a practical standpoint, there is no police force. The right to possess firearms dispossesses the criminal from the advantage of the fact that there are no police present.

If the private ownership of firearms was banned, the police would be able to possess and use firearms for their protection, but law-abiding citizens would not to able to. That will never fly in this country. In the U.S., law-abiding citizens are granted a measure of personal sovereignty over the security of their persons and homes. This means that they may protect their lives, their homes and families, and even innocent third parties, at the moment of crisis, when there are no police around to protect them, using lethal force with a firearm if necessary. This right is, of course, subject to all applicable laws that govern the justifiable use of force.

And finally, if we ban firearms, we may as well ban camping and backpacking. We should close all of our national forests and wilderness areas to recreational uses. Because out there, an unarmed human is not at the top of the food chain. An unarmed human is prey. That's no joke.

This cat is estimated to be well over 200 lbs. The photo was taken in my state by a friend of mine. The cougar is standing over a dead adult cow elk. If you know how large an adult elk is, then you can appreciate the size of this brute standing over it.

cougar 3.JPG


Most of ur responses is going off the topic - like u mentioned about me waffling on, about tipping.

I’ve never mentioned banning fire arms, but simply restricting the type available to the general public.

There are many countries that allow their citizens to be in possession of firearms but the USA has the dubious reputation of
being a murderous country amongst the develop world.


Chuck


There are no specific firearm restrictions spelled out in the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution, or anywhere else in the US Constitution for that matter, therefore the US Constitution does not "expressly" give the Government any Power to restrict the type of Firearms a Citizen can use in Self-Defense.......be the foe foreign, or domestic, be they invading forces, common violent criminals, or the government itself!

The Second Amendment does "expressly" state however, "....the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.", leaving the decision in the hands of the American People what firearms they can use in self-defense, not the government's.

BTW.....Americans have an unalienable RIGHT to Firearms!

They don't need permission or prior authorization to Keep & Bear Arms from any Government!


..
Last edited by DreamRyderX on 08 Jul 2019, 12:32, edited 1 time in total.
Never water yerself down just because someone might not be able ta handle ya at "190 Proof"
User avatar
DreamRyderX
Pitbull terrier
 
Posts: 439
Joined: 14 Jul 2018, 11:45
Location: In Yer Dreams.............
spamone: Animal

Re: Get over it: Americans are allowed to have guns!

Postby Bongalong » 08 Jul 2019, 12:26

SethBullock wrote:
Bongalong wrote:Are you trying to say that teachers in America should be assigned the protection of their students even under attack from psychopathic class mates with guns? Um, if you start telling them that they will start demanding more money.... :rofl


Teachers have proven time and again that they will try to protect their students in a crisis.

I'll bet you a six pack of Deschutes beers that your dear friend Hatty would do everything in his power to protect his students under his care in a crisis. That crisis could be a fire or earthquake. It could be someone trying to kidnap one of his students. Or it could be someone trying to kill with a knife or a gun. Yes, your best friend forever, Hatty, would do anything in his power to protect them. He would even use lethal force - just like Aussie would - if there was no alternative and if he had the means.

So, given that the will to protect is already present, why would we instead choose to enforce helplessness? That makes no sense to me.

Seth, I'm glad you aren't in a position of power buddy because we can all handle the family cop once every 5 years but be damned if I'm following your bullshite my whole life.

My Nieces mum(ie my cousin) turned into a female cop and wouldn't let her daughter go to leavers at the end of year twelve. So the niece left her mum forever; changed both her first name and last name and is now thinking about changing her gender.

:roll
"Oi!"
Bongalong
Warthog
 
Posts: 3203
Joined: 25 Jun 2018, 11:48
spamone: Animal

Re: Get over it: Americans are allowed to have guns!

Postby Bongalong » 08 Jul 2019, 12:29

Chuck wrote:
SethBullock wrote:
Chuck wrote:Wasn’t the constitution written when the country had no army or police force ...


And a point about this ...

Generally speaking, a criminal does not commit a murder, rape, robbery, kidnapping or assault when the police are around. They commit these crimes when, from a practical standpoint, there is no police force. The right to possess firearms dispossesses the criminal from the advantage of the fact that there are no police present.

If the private ownership of firearms was banned, the police would be able to possess and use firearms for their protection, but law-abiding citizens would not to able to. That will never fly in this country. In the U.S., law-abiding citizens are granted a measure of personal sovereignty over the security of their persons and homes. This means that they may protect their lives, their homes and families, and even innocent third parties, at the moment of crisis, when there are no police around to protect them, using lethal force with a firearm if necessary. This right is, of course, subject to all applicable laws that govern the justifiable use of force.

And finally, if we ban firearms, we may as well ban camping and backpacking. We should close all of our national forests and wilderness areas to recreational uses. Because out there, an unarmed human is not at the top of the food chain. An unarmed human is prey. That's no joke.

This cat is estimated to be well over 200 lbs. The photo was taken in my state by a friend of mine. The cougar is standing over a dead adult cow elk. If you know how large an adult elk is, then you can appreciate the size of this brute standing over it.

cougar 3.JPG


Most of ur responses is going off the topic - like u mentioned about me waffling on, about tipping.

I’ve never mentioned banning fire arms, but simply restricting the type available to the general public.

There are many countries that allow their citizens to be in possession of firearms but the USA has the dubious reputation of
being a murderous country amongst the develop world.

Chuck

I don't think America cares what your interpretation of its alleged reputation is.
"Oi!"
Bongalong
Warthog
 
Posts: 3203
Joined: 25 Jun 2018, 11:48
spamone: Animal

Re: Get over it: Americans are allowed to have guns!

Postby SethBullock » 08 Jul 2019, 12:36

Bongalong wrote:
SethBullock wrote:
Bongalong wrote:Are you trying to say that teachers in America should be assigned the protection of their students even under attack from psychopathic class mates with guns? Um, if you start telling them that they will start demanding more money.... :rofl


Teachers have proven time and again that they will try to protect their students in a crisis.

I'll bet you a six pack of Deschutes beers that your dear friend Hatty would do everything in his power to protect his students under his care in a crisis. That crisis could be a fire or earthquake. It could be someone trying to kidnap one of his students. Or it could be someone trying to kill with a knife or a gun. Yes, your best friend forever, Hatty, would do anything in his power to protect them. He would even use lethal force - just like Aussie would - if there was no alternative and if he had the means.

So, given that the will to protect is already present, why would we instead choose to enforce helplessness? That makes no sense to me.

Seth, I'm glad you aren't in a position of power buddy because we can all handle the family cop once every 5 years but be damned if I'm following your bullshite my whole life.

My Nieces mum(ie my cousin) turned into a female cop and wouldn't let her daughter go to leavers at the end of year twelve. So the niece left her mum forever; changed both her first name and last name and is now thinking about changing her gender.

:roll


Well damn! It's a good thing I'm not in a position of power ... :beer
"At least he's not Hillary" - Hatty

"There's only one solution: MORE guns!" - greggerypeccary

... "mr know it all" - Bongalong
User avatar
SethBullock
Jaguar
 
Posts: 2235
Joined: 22 Oct 2018, 12:37
Location: Oregon, USA
spamone: Animal

Get over it: Americans have a RIGHT to Guns!

Postby DreamRyderX » 08 Jul 2019, 12:41

Bongalong wrote:
Chuck wrote:
SethBullock wrote:
Chuck wrote:Wasn’t the constitution written when the country had no army or police force ...


And a point about this ...

Generally speaking, a criminal does not commit a murder, rape, robbery, kidnapping or assault when the police are around. They commit these crimes when, from a practical standpoint, there is no police force. The right to possess firearms dispossesses the criminal from the advantage of the fact that there are no police present.

If the private ownership of firearms was banned, the police would be able to possess and use firearms for their protection, but law-abiding citizens would not to able to. That will never fly in this country. In the U.S., law-abiding citizens are granted a measure of personal sovereignty over the security of their persons and homes. This means that they may protect their lives, their homes and families, and even innocent third parties, at the moment of crisis, when there are no police around to protect them, using lethal force with a firearm if necessary. This right is, of course, subject to all applicable laws that govern the justifiable use of force.

And finally, if we ban firearms, we may as well ban camping and backpacking. We should close all of our national forests and wilderness areas to recreational uses. Because out there, an unarmed human is not at the top of the food chain. An unarmed human is prey. That's no joke.

This cat is estimated to be well over 200 lbs. The photo was taken in my state by a friend of mine. The cougar is standing over a dead adult cow elk. If you know how large an adult elk is, then you can appreciate the size of this brute standing over it.

cougar 3.JPG


Most of ur responses is going off the topic - like u mentioned about me waffling on, about tipping.

I’ve never mentioned banning fire arms, but simply restricting the type available to the general public.

There are many countries that allow their citizens to be in possession of firearms but the USA has the dubious reputation of
being a murderous country amongst the develop world.

Chuck

I don't think America cares what your interpretation of its alleged reputation is.



" I don't think America cares what your interpretation of its alleged reputation is. "

You got that 110% A-1 right there sport, & they never will neither!!Image

That said though, Americans will always respect his right to have a personal opinion,
if not the opinion itself. Image


..
Last edited by DreamRyderX on 08 Jul 2019, 12:51, edited 1 time in total.
Never water yerself down just because someone might not be able ta handle ya at "190 Proof"
User avatar
DreamRyderX
Pitbull terrier
 
Posts: 439
Joined: 14 Jul 2018, 11:45
Location: In Yer Dreams.............
spamone: Animal

Re: Get over it: Americans have a RIGHT to Guns!

Postby Bongalong » 08 Jul 2019, 12:49

DreamRyderX wrote:
Bongalong wrote:
Chuck wrote:
SethBullock wrote:
Chuck wrote:Wasn’t the constitution written when the country had no army or police force ...


And a point about this ...

Generally speaking, a criminal does not commit a murder, rape, robbery, kidnapping or assault when the police are around. They commit these crimes when, from a practical standpoint, there is no police force. The right to possess firearms dispossesses the criminal from the advantage of the fact that there are no police present.

If the private ownership of firearms was banned, the police would be able to possess and use firearms for their protection, but law-abiding citizens would not to able to. That will never fly in this country. In the U.S., law-abiding citizens are granted a measure of personal sovereignty over the security of their persons and homes. This means that they may protect their lives, their homes and families, and even innocent third parties, at the moment of crisis, when there are no police around to protect them, using lethal force with a firearm if necessary. This right is, of course, subject to all applicable laws that govern the justifiable use of force.

And finally, if we ban firearms, we may as well ban camping and backpacking. We should close all of our national forests and wilderness areas to recreational uses. Because out there, an unarmed human is not at the top of the food chain. An unarmed human is prey. That's no joke.

This cat is estimated to be well over 200 lbs. The photo was taken in my state by a friend of mine. The cougar is standing over a dead adult cow elk. If you know how large an adult elk is, then you can appreciate the size of this brute standing over it.

cougar 3.JPG


Most of ur responses is going off the topic - like u mentioned about me waffling on, about tipping.

I’ve never mentioned banning fire arms, but simply restricting the type available to the general public.

There are many countries that allow their citizens to be in possession of firearms but the USA has the dubious reputation of
being a murderous country amongst the develop world.

Chuck

I don't think America cares what your interpretation of its alleged reputation is.



'I don't think America cares what your interpretation of its alleged reputation is."

You got that 110% A-1 right there sport, & they never will neither!!Image

That said though, Americans will always respect his right to have a personal opinion, if not the opinion itself. Image


..

And yet you say you're not a democracy? :roll The very thing you're fighting for is the right to have an opinion: is that not the very meaning of democracy? Is that not the very thing Farage likes about Trump and vice a versa?

:yak yak
"Oi!"
Bongalong
Warthog
 
Posts: 3203
Joined: 25 Jun 2018, 11:48
spamone: Animal

Re: Get over it: Americans have a RIGHT to Guns!

Postby DreamRyderX » 08 Jul 2019, 13:04

Bongalong wrote:
DreamRyderX wrote:
Bongalong wrote:
Chuck wrote:
SethBullock wrote:
Chuck wrote:Wasn’t the constitution written when the country had no army or police force ...


And a point about this ...

Generally speaking, a criminal does not commit a murder, rape, robbery, kidnapping or assault when the police are around. They commit these crimes when, from a practical standpoint, there is no police force. The right to possess firearms dispossesses the criminal from the advantage of the fact that there are no police present.

If the private ownership of firearms was banned, the police would be able to possess and use firearms for their protection, but law-abiding citizens would not to able to. That will never fly in this country. In the U.S., law-abiding citizens are granted a measure of personal sovereignty over the security of their persons and homes. This means that they may protect their lives, their homes and families, and even innocent third parties, at the moment of crisis, when there are no police around to protect them, using lethal force with a firearm if necessary. This right is, of course, subject to all applicable laws that govern the justifiable use of force.

And finally, if we ban firearms, we may as well ban camping and backpacking. We should close all of our national forests and wilderness areas to recreational uses. Because out there, an unarmed human is not at the top of the food chain. An unarmed human is prey. That's no joke.

This cat is estimated to be well over 200 lbs. The photo was taken in my state by a friend of mine. The cougar is standing over a dead adult cow elk. If you know how large an adult elk is, then you can appreciate the size of this brute standing over it.

cougar 3.JPG


Most of ur responses is going off the topic - like u mentioned about me waffling on, about tipping.

I’ve never mentioned banning fire arms, but simply restricting the type available to the general public.

There are many countries that allow their citizens to be in possession of firearms but the USA has the dubious reputation of
being a murderous country amongst the develop world.

Chuck

I don't think America cares what your interpretation of its alleged reputation is.



'I don't think America cares what your interpretation of its alleged reputation is."

You got that 110% A-1 right there sport, & they never will neither!!Image

That said though, Americans will always respect his right to have a personal opinion, if not the opinion itself. Image


..

And yet you say you're not a democracy? :roll The very thing you're fighting for is the right to have an opinion: is that not the very meaning of democracy? Is that not the very thing Farage likes about Trump and vice a versa?

:yak yak


The right to his opinion is part & parcel to his unalienable Natural Right to Free Speech........it has nothing to do with Democracy. Democracy is nothing more than a political system......merely a form/type of government.


America's Founding Fathers incorporated a few principals of Democracy into the new American government, but America is not a Democracy, it is a Constitutional Republic.......The American Founding Fathers wanted nothing to do with instituting a Democracy....they despised Democracy!

.BTW, the above unalienable Right, the unalienable Natural Right to Free Speech.....is protected in the First Amendment of the United States Constitution.........it even protects "Hate Speech" (except for fighting words) for that matter (link) .......show me how many Democracies, you know of, that would do that. Image


..
Never water yerself down just because someone might not be able ta handle ya at "190 Proof"
User avatar
DreamRyderX
Pitbull terrier
 
Posts: 439
Joined: 14 Jul 2018, 11:45
Location: In Yer Dreams.............
spamone: Animal

Re: Get over it: Americans are allowed to have guns!

Postby pinkeye » 09 Jul 2019, 03:29

Umm didn't you just admit America is NOT a democracy?

so ? your post(below)



The right to his opinion is part & parcel to his unalienable Natural Right to Free Speech........it has nothing to do with Democracy. Democracy is nothing more than a political system......merely a form/type of government.


America's Founding Fathers incorporated a few principals of Democracy into the new American government, but America is not a Democracy, it is a Constitutional Republic.......The American Founding Fathers wanted nothing to do with instituting a Democracy....they despised Democracy!

.BTW, the above unalienable Right, the unalienable Natural Right to Free Speech.....is protected in the First Amendment of the United States Constitution.........it even protects "Hate Speech" (except for fighting words) for that matter (link) .......show me how many Democracies, you know of, that would do that...………...



MAKES SENSE.!!!! :Hi :roll :bgrin
sleeping is good for you
User avatar
pinkeye
Warthog
 
Posts: 4156
Joined: 01 Oct 2017, 20:59
spamone: Animal

PreviousNext

Return to Politics

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests