VeggieBoards

VeggieBoards (https://www.veggieboards.com/forum/)
-   The Compost Heap (https://www.veggieboards.com/forum/17-compost-heap/)
-   -   Poll should the US abolish the 2nd amendment? (https://www.veggieboards.com/forum/17-compost-heap/64356-poll-should-us-abolish-2nd-amendment.html)

havocjohn 04-05-2007 08:35 PM

and give up our right to bear arms?



1) yes



2) no

Skylark 04-05-2007 08:42 PM

No, the government has no business telling me not to wear T-shirts and tank tops.




sybaritik 04-05-2007 09:17 PM


Sevenseas 04-06-2007 12:24 AM

I really couldn't care less. It's funny to me how some people seem to think having a gun is some kind of a basic human right. Oh the humanity.

HandcuffedAngel 04-06-2007 12:32 AM

I'm in the middle about this amendment.



Protection is one thing, but a lot of times guns that are bought for protection are used in homicides. They also often fall into the wrong hands, such as the hands of a child, and the child shoots his/her friend on accident.



Guns are dangerous things. I think people could find better, less lethal ways to protect themselves. However, in a society where everyone else has a gun then I guess a gun for protection makes the most sense.



I guess I'll say I'm for the abolishment of this. I think we'd be better off without guns. I just never really got why it's considered a "right" to have something made for killing.

thebelovedtree 04-06-2007 01:37 AM

I go shooting regularly, and am saving up for my own hand gun, hand gun classes, and concealed carry classes. Taking guns away from legal owners doesn't keep criminals from having them, and personally, if someone breaks into my house with a gun I want something a little better than mace on my side and I want to know how to use it. There are many guns that are illegal in various states and friends in law enforcement has assured me that making them illegal doesn't keep criminals from having them, or even make them that difficult to obtain. Considering the number of guns already in this country one would be hard pressed to keep them from criminals if the second amendment were abolished. Since Britain outlawed guns their crime rate has gone way up, because now criminals know their victims aren't armed.



I have always preferred to take care of myself, when possible, and my personal safety is something that I'd rather take more into my own hands, now that I'm of legal age to own a gun.

otomik 04-06-2007 02:31 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by skylark View Post

No, the government has no business telling me not to wear T-shirts and tank tops.




Ron Burgundy: The only way to bag a classy lady is to give her two tickets to the gun show... [kisses his biceps] and see if she likes the goods.

GhostUser 04-06-2007 04:11 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by HandcuffedAngel View Post

I'm in the middle about this amendment.



Protection is one thing, but a lot of times guns that are bought for protection are used in homicides. They also often fall into the wrong hands, such as the hands of a child, and the child shoots his/her friend on accident.



Guns are dangerous things. I think people could find better, less lethal ways to protect themselves. However, in a society where everyone else has a gun then I guess a gun for protection makes the most sense.



I guess I'll say I'm for the abolishment of this. I think we'd be better off without guns. I just never really got why it's considered a "right" to have something made for killing.



Guns are inanimate objects and are not dangerous at all. More people die from motor vehicle accidents then guns. Should we ban cars? Heart disease and cancer at the top of the list. Why not make a poor diet illegal? Force people to exercise?



Saying guns cause crime is like saying your keyboard cuases mipselled wrods, or water causes people to drown, or matches cause arson. or needles cause drug abuse, or alcohal causes alcohalism, or cars cause teen pregnancy, etc etc.



We have a "right" to defend ourselves. Even from our own Government. In every rise of a dictator, the first thing to go is the peoples rights to bear arms. Why do you think that is?



Have you ever been in any type of natural or man made disaster? Try visiting an area during a blizzard, hurricane, wildland fire, flood, etc. Maybe, if you need protection, you will be lucky enough to have one of those crazy, gun tot'n civilians keep you from being murdered for the loose change in your pocket.

Kiz 04-06-2007 04:16 AM

I've always thought it a bit odd how some Americans see carrying guns as some sort of basic human right.

Sevenseas 04-06-2007 04:18 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kiz View Post

I've always thought it a bit odd how some Americans see carrying guns as some sort of basic human right.

How could you think so? That seems like a very weird perception to me.

GhostUser 04-06-2007 04:22 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kiz View Post

I've always thought it a bit odd how some Americans see carrying guns as some sort of basic human right.



You don't feel that self defense is a basic human right?

GhostUser 04-06-2007 04:23 AM

A big hell no to the op. I wouldn't feel safe in my hood without it.

Sevenseas 04-06-2007 04:23 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ducati View Post

You don't feel that self defense is a basic human right?

Having a gun is a basic human right if you equate pretending to be Dirty Harry to self-defense.

Sevenseas 04-06-2007 04:27 AM

I don't have a gun (and I probably couldn't get one) and yet I've never thought that my right to self-defence has been compromised one bit. If someone attacks me, I can cause violence to him/her and probably not be charged of anything. In other words, seems like I have the right to defend myself.

GhostUser 04-06-2007 04:40 AM

I don't own a gun either and hate the idea that they even exist but I do support other's rights to own them. Freedom shouldn't be limited by my objections or anyone elses.



That said, people who think they can repel govt. oppression with a couple of shotguns and a semi-automatic rifle are delusional.

Sevenseas 04-06-2007 04:46 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by pkk View Post

That said, people who think they can repel govt. oppression with a couple of shotguns and a semi-automatic rifle are delusional.

Haven't you seen Die Hard? The individual's abilities are easy to underestimate, IMO.

Kiz 04-06-2007 04:53 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ducati View Post

You don't feel that self defense is a basic human right?



Well, there's just a little bit of a difference between self defence and owning a gun, don't you think? Just a tiny bit maybe?



If you think your government should permit gun-ownership, that's one thing, it's another to think gun owning is some basic human right. There's a bit of a jump there. Most pro-gun Americans I've talked to about it (whether I agree with their point of view or not) argue from the "constitutional rights" point of view. A very few have argued from a human rights point of view. I just find those very few to be rather weird is all.

GhostUser 04-06-2007 05:03 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kiz View Post

Well, there's just a little bit of a difference between self defence and owning a gun, don't you think? Just a tiny bit maybe?



If you think your government should permit gun-ownership, that's one thing, it's another to think gun owning is some basic human right. There's a bit of a jump there. Most pro-gun Americans I've talked to about it (whether I agree with their point of view or not) argue from the "constitutional rights" point of view. A very few have argued from a human rights point of view. I just find those very few to be rather weird is all.



Freedom and the right to life are fundamental human rights.



Limiting someone elses to suit your taste is oppression.

Sevenseas 04-06-2007 05:05 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by pkk View Post


Limiting someone elses to suit your taste is oppression.

How does a gun ban limit the right to life?



I also think that to argue against a ban on the ground that it limits freedom is pretty trivial, as all bans or prohibitions limit freedom.

GhostUser 04-06-2007 05:24 AM

A gun ban doesn't limit the right to life.



Kiz mentioned human rights as opposed to constitutional rights and I was referring to that.



A ban on guns would be trivial to me in terms of my use of them but what's trivial to me might not be to someone else.

Sevenseas 04-06-2007 05:43 AM

Ok, thanks for clarifying.



I wasn't saying that the gun issue itself is necessarily trivial but that the argument "it restricts freedom" is not very good when discussing a ban.

Wolfie 04-06-2007 05:50 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by havocjohn View Post

and give up our right to bear arms?



1) yes



2) no



No.

Elena99 04-06-2007 05:53 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kiz View Post

Well, there's just a little bit of a difference between self defence and owning a gun, don't you think? Just a tiny bit maybe?



If you think your government should permit gun-ownership, that's one thing, it's another to think gun owning is some basic human right. There's a bit of a jump there. Most pro-gun Americans I've talked to about it (whether I agree with their point of view or not) argue from the "constitutional rights" point of view. A very few have argued from a human rights point of view. I just find those very few to be rather weird is all.



I have to agree with Kiz, it does seem weird. In Canada, we don't have the right to bear arms, but that doesn't mean that people can't have guns under certain situations, or that people are left defenseless. It wouldn't seem weird to Americans, most of them anyway, because they grew up with that knowledge.

isowish 04-06-2007 05:56 AM

It doesn't matter to me because I'm far away, but I just wanted to agree with others who have said that they live in a country where they don't have the "right to bear arms" (I'm not sure that I'm allowed pepper spray actually, which is one thing I've heard Americans talk about a lot, I've never seen it here or known anyone to have it) and don't feel that the government is making them defenceless. *shrug*



On the other hand, I live in a relatively safe suburb and don't spend much time outside in the city at night alone. I guess I'm not entering into this debate

TrailMix 04-06-2007 07:08 AM

You can do a lot to control gun abuse in the U.S. without affecting the 2nd Amendment. I'd rather just leave the Bill of Rights alone.

GhostUser 04-06-2007 09:20 AM

SKYLARKBeing a Radio DJ means being an investigative reporterconsequently I am on a must see basis..LOL

GhostUser 04-06-2007 09:49 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kiz View Post

Well, there's just a little bit of a difference between self defence and owning a gun, don't you think? Just a tiny bit maybe?



If you think your government should permit gun-ownership, that's one thing, it's another to think gun owning is some basic human right. There's a bit of a jump there. Most pro-gun Americans I've talked to about it (whether I agree with their point of view or not) argue from the "constitutional rights" point of view. A very few have argued from a human rights point of view. I just find those very few to be rather weird is all.



Do you think criminals should have guns? We should have a law thans bans criminals from having guns! Or that people are criminals if they use guns in a crime. Oh wait, we already have those laws, and they work so well.



I don't think owning a gun a a basic human right, I feel that all law abidinng citizens, of age, who have undergone the proper training should be allowed to carry guns.



If you are in a restaurant and some gunman starts shooting everyone in sight and you are next, aren't you hoping someone in the room has a gun and is going to shoot him?



When you make it criminal to carry a gun, then only criminals will carry guns.

Red 04-06-2007 10:06 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sevenseas View Post

How does a gun ban limit the right to life?



I also think that to argue against a ban on the ground that it limits freedom is pretty trivial, as all bans or prohibitions limit freedom.



In that case, why not up the ante and ban free speech, freedom of religion and freedom of association while you're at it?



Those bans would all serve to give more social control (obviously a good thing), and none of them would limit a persons "right to life", either.

Treehugger267 04-06-2007 10:08 AM

The criminals here have guns. I doubt we would be able to defend ourselves against them with a stick. If they were banned at this point, it would be the law abiding people that would have theirs revoked. I highly doubt the criminals have theirs registered.



All of this uprising against the government stuff that is being talked about is really kind of frightening. I doubt the shot gun we have would do much against our own army.

Skylark 04-06-2007 11:12 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by TONYSTAROLDIES View Post

SKYLARKBeing a Radio DJ means being an investigative reporterconsequently I am on a must see basis..LOL



What in the heck?



Oh, now I get it. I should probably tell you I recently permed my hair into a massive 'fro, and I am now hideously unattractive by your standards.


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:37 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity v2.2.2 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2020 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2020 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.