Most important reason to oppose a new AWB?

This is a discussion on Most important reason to oppose a new AWB? within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; Originally Posted by 38special If you lived in a country which prohibited private gun ownership then you would not have the right to bear arms...therefore, ...

View Poll Results: #1 reason you need an assault weapon?

Voters
141. You may not vote on this poll
  • Target Shooting

    14 9.93%
  • Varmint Hunting

    4 2.84%
  • Collecting

    2 1.42%
  • Home/Personal Defense

    59 41.84%
  • Countervailing force against foreign enemies

    2 1.42%
  • Countervailing force against tyranny

    60 42.55%
Page 4 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 93
Like Tree67Likes

Thread: Most important reason to oppose a new AWB?

  1. #46
    VIP Member Array 1MoreGoodGuy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Fort Worth, Texas
    Posts
    6,130
    Quote Originally Posted by 38special View Post
    If you lived in a country which prohibited private gun ownership then you would not have the right to bear arms...therefore, gun ownership is not a fundamental, "God given" human right. The United States currently recognized private gun ownership and permits you to keep and bear arms. However, the United States also limits your right. You cannot carry concealed without a permit, you cannot carry in federal buildings, you cannot purchase newly manufactured automatic weapons, you must apply for additional permission to own short barrel lengths, etc. The Supreme Court is free to interpret "infringement" the way THEY see fit, not the way you see, not the way your father sees it, not the way your neighbor sees it, and not the way I see it. Your right to bear arms exists at the pleasure of the government. We've already had an "assault weapon" ban and there will probably be another. Like I've said, the Second Amendment is not set in stone. A new amendment can be created, the Second Amendment can be re-amended, and the whole Constitution can be rewritten. I am 100% pro gun, but there are many powerful, vocal opposers and if we continue with the childish "because it's my right" arguments then we will lose and the Second Amendment will disappear.
    Your argument contains numerous flaws. We must agree to disagree. One of us is right and the other one is wrong. By the way, you can not be "100% pro gun" if you believe that the government is allowed to disarm the populace simply because the government wants to. There is nothing pro gun about that.

    If you or anyone else you know paid for any part of your education, then you should demand a refund.
    Regards,
    1MoreGoodGuy
    NRA Life Member
    GOA Life Member


    Behave Like Someone Who is Determined to be FREE!

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #47
    VIP Member Array zonker1986's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Orlando, Florida
    Posts
    3,573
    Quote Originally Posted by 38special View Post
    were created by the government and can be "uncreated" with enough passing votes. If the Second Amendment is repealed then the government will take your guns and prevent gun ownership. If you refuse then you will be imprisoned. If you fight back then you will be killed...they have tanks, ships, jets, bombed, etc. and they will win.

    Women have not always had the right to vote. Blacks have not always had freedom. Those rights were given to them, not by birth, but at the pleasure of the government...just as gun ownership.
    apparently you do not understand what the 2nd Amendment actually means to our Liberty, and what must be done to protect it at all costs.......let me clarify it for you:

    remington79 and 1MoreGoodGuy like this.
    Kimbers are the guns you show your friends....Glocks are the ones you show your enemies.

  4. #48
    Member Array 38special's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    79
    Quote Originally Posted by 1MoreGoodGuy View Post
    By the way, you can not be "100% pro gun" if you believe that the government is allowed to disarm the populace simply because the government wants to. There is nothing pro gun about that.
    I did not say the government could disarm the populace because they wanted to. I said they could create/amend legislation which allows them to disarm us. Big difference. Additionally, I didn't say I supported that initiative, but I do recognize the possibility and I'm fearful of it. "We the people" make up our government and "we the people" create our laws...unfortunately "we the people" put Obama in office and kept him there. "We the people" are also pushing very hard to take our gun ownership rights away. You are sitting here arguing that the government cannot infringe on gun ownership rights; you don't seem to realize that they already do infringe. Requiring concealed carry permits and performing background checks prior to purchase are infringements. Requiring me to get a tax stamp to own a 14 inch barreled shotgun is an infringement. Allowing CA to limit magazine capacity is an infringement. The infringements will continue to expand if we don't do something. The Second Amendment is not concrete and it isn't safe.

  5. #49
    VIP Member Array 1MoreGoodGuy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Fort Worth, Texas
    Posts
    6,130
    Quote Originally Posted by 38special View Post
    were created by the government and can be "uncreated" with enough passing votes. If the Second Amendment is repealed then the government will take your guns and prevent gun ownership. If you refuse then you will be imprisoned. If you fight back then you will be killed...they have tanks, ships, jets, bombed, etc. and they will win.

    Women have not always had the right to vote. Blacks have not always had freedom. Those rights were given to them, not by birth, but at the pleasure of the government...just as gun ownership.
    So now you are saying that the government is all-powerful and has the authority to murder the populace at will if the populace disagrees with the government. WOW!

    Do you know about the big buildings where they keep all the books? It's call a library. Please go to one and start reading.
    Regards,
    1MoreGoodGuy
    NRA Life Member
    GOA Life Member


    Behave Like Someone Who is Determined to be FREE!

  6. #50
    Member Array 38special's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    79
    Quote Originally Posted by zonker1986 View Post
    apparently you do not understand what the 2nd Amendment actually means to our Liberty, and what must be done to protect it at all costs.......let me clarify it for you:

    I most certainly understand what it means...that's why I'm fearful of new legislation and why I want it protected. And let me assure you, your hands will be cold and dead and they will remove it from them because "we the people" cannot defeat our government.

  7. #51
    Member Array 38special's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    79
    Quote Originally Posted by 1MoreGoodGuy View Post
    So now you are saying that the government is all-powerful and has the authority to murder the populace at will if the populace disagrees with the government. WOW!

    Do you know about the big buildings where they keep all the books? It's call a library. Please go to one and start reading.
    I'm not sure where you got that from what I wrote...and I'm not sure why the insults are necessary.

  8. #52
    VIP Member Array 1MoreGoodGuy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Fort Worth, Texas
    Posts
    6,130
    Quote Originally Posted by 38special View Post
    I did not say the government could disarm the populace because they wanted to. I said they could create/amend legislation which allows them to disarm us. Big difference. Additionally, I didn't say I supported that initiative, but I do recognize the possibility and I'm fearful of it. "We the people" make up our government and "we the people" create our laws...unfortunately "we the people" put Obama in office and kept him there. "We the people" are also pushing very hard to take our gun ownership rights away. You are sitting here arguing that the government cannot infringe on gun ownership rights; you don't seem to realize that they already do infringe. Requiring concealed carry permits and performing background checks prior to purchase are infringements. Requiring me to get a tax stamp to own a 14 inch barreled shotgun is an infringement. Allowing CA to limit magazine capacity is an infringement. The infringements will continue to expand if we don't do something. The Second Amendment is not concrete and it isn't safe.
    "Big difference"...Obviously you and I don't have the same definition for the word "difference".

    Since you have only been on this forum for 7 posts, I suggest you go do a search for other things that I have written on this site before you make an assumption that I "don't seem to realize" something. Once again you are ill-informed about what you are claiming.
    Regards,
    1MoreGoodGuy
    NRA Life Member
    GOA Life Member


    Behave Like Someone Who is Determined to be FREE!

  9. #53
    VIP Member Array zonker1986's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Orlando, Florida
    Posts
    3,573
    Quote Originally Posted by 38special View Post
    I most certainly understand what it means...that's why I'm fearful of new legislation and why I want it protected. And let me assure you, your hands will be cold and dead and they will remove it from them because "we the people" cannot defeat our government.
    well, I will die with a lot of spent brass around me. Wanna be the first couple of ATF agents that come to my door to confiscate my guns? I'm not alone in this opinion.....trust me.
    You see, I've studied history, and I know that if we are disarmed, what is to follow. I take this and the future of my country very seriously.
    1MoreGoodGuy likes this.
    Kimbers are the guns you show your friends....Glocks are the ones you show your enemies.

  10. #54
    VIP Member Array 1MoreGoodGuy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Fort Worth, Texas
    Posts
    6,130
    Quote Originally Posted by 38special View Post
    I'm not sure where you got that from what I wrote...and I'm not sure why the insults are necessary.
    Because the killing you described is murder.

    Why would you be insulted by someone saying you should read books? Do you not like books? Should we ban those too?
    Regards,
    1MoreGoodGuy
    NRA Life Member
    GOA Life Member


    Behave Like Someone Who is Determined to be FREE!

  11. #55
    Member Array 38special's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    79
    Quote Originally Posted by 1MoreGoodGuy View Post
    "Big difference"...Obviously you and I don't have the same definition for the word "difference".

    Since you have only been on this forum for 7 posts, I suggest you go do a search for other things that I have written on this site before you make an assumption that I "don't seem to realize" something. Once again you are ill-informed about what you are claiming.
    You are claiming that the government "shall not infringe" on your firearm rights. I am asserting that they already do. If you "do realize it" then why are you arguing? If you don't realize it then, well, you don't realize it. You are claiming that the government can't create Constitutional Amendments and then use imprisonment and force to enforce them. It's already been done with the Eighteenth Amendment. Prohibition has since been repealed. I am asserting that a large enough push could cause the Second Amendment to be repealed. The Constitution is a living document and there are procedures in place to create changes. What am I ill-informed about?

  12. #56
    Member Array 38special's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    79
    Quote Originally Posted by zonker1986 View Post
    well, I will die with a lot of spent brass around me. Wanna be the first couple of ATF agents that come to my door to confiscate my guns? I'm not alone in this opinion.....trust me.
    You see, I've studied history, and I know that if we are disarmed, what is to follow. I take this and the future of my country very seriously.
    I'm not disagreeing. Many people would fight back...but I don't think much success would be had. We've already let our government become too powerful.

  13. #57
    Member Array 38special's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    79
    Quote Originally Posted by 1MoreGoodGuy View Post
    Because the killing you described is murder.

    Why would you be insulted by someone saying you should read books? Do you not like books? Should we ban those too?
    I believe the term would be "justifiable homicide" as opposed to "murder". If the government outlaws firearms, you refuse to relinquish them, and you use your firearms to defend against the execution of signed search warrants, then you would most certainly be killed...and, in they eyes of the government, it would be justifiable.

    And it is insulting because, using my inferencing and contextual skills, you are insinuating that I am uneducated. But kudos on your cute attempt at sarcasm.

  14. #58
    Member Array 38special's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    79
    Quote Originally Posted by 1MoreGoodGuy View Post
    Should we ban those too?
    And for the fourth or fifth time now, I never said firearms should be banned. You are creating straw men and putting words in my mouth. Let me repeate myself yet again in all caps for clarity: I DO NOT SUPPORT GUN CONTROL LAWS OR BANS. I AM FEARFUL OF GUN CONTROL. IT IS A SLIPPERY SLOPE. I AM POINTING OUT THE DANGERS WE ARE FACING AND THE VERY REAL POSSIBILITY OF LOSING OUR SECOND AMENDMENT RIGHTS. I'm not sure how much clearer I can be about my stance.

  15. #59
    VIP Member Array 1MoreGoodGuy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Fort Worth, Texas
    Posts
    6,130
    Quote Originally Posted by 38special View Post
    You are claiming that the government "shall not infringe" on your firearm rights. I am asserting that they already do. If you "do realize it" then why are you arguing? If you don't realize it then, well, you don't realize it. You are claiming that the government can't create Constitutional Amendments and then use imprisonment and force to enforce them. It's already been done with the Eighteenth Amendment. Prohibition has since been repealed. I am asserting that a large enough push could cause the Second Amendment to be repealed. The Constitution is a living document and there are procedures in place to create changes. What am I ill-informed about?
    You are ill-informed about a lot of things and you seem to be unable to recognize that your arguments contain flaws. That is why I suggested that you go read some books. I do not mean that to be offensive in any way. Reading books is a great way to gain knowledge so that you can educate yourself without being subjected to outside influences.

    Please go back and read all the posts again because, judging by the post quoted up above, you and I are not having the same argument.

    You need to learn the definition of what a "Right" is and you also need to learn the definition of what a "privilege" is. Those two words are not interchangeable and they don't come from the same place. Once you learn the true meaning of those words, things will seem a whole lot different to you than they do now. There is a big difference between where a "Right" comes from and where a "privilege" comes from. After you learn the true meanings you need to apply that knowledge to each and every "Right" or "privilege" that you have or don't have and identify which are the "Rights" and which are the "privileges". Again, I do not mean to offend you in any way and there is nothing wrong with being ill-informed about a subject as long as you take the time to educate yourself about the subjects you wish to knowledgeably speak to others about. There have been plenty of subjects that was ill-informed about until I learned from other or learned from reading books. Use logic and stick to the facts. Ask lots of questions and seek the truth. Not everyone will tell you the truth. It is your job to identify what is the truth and what is not the truth. Do not rely on other peoples "facts". Verify everything before emphatically stating your conclusion.
    Regards,
    1MoreGoodGuy
    NRA Life Member
    GOA Life Member


    Behave Like Someone Who is Determined to be FREE!

  16. #60
    VIP Member Array ccw9mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    26,767
    Quote Originally Posted by 1MoreGoodGuy View Post
    You need to learn the definition of what a "Right" is and you also need to learn the definition of what a "privilege" is.
    And yet, there's a grain of truth in there, on the question of the 2A and the rest of the BOR.

    One has every right to transport oneself from here to there (walking running, buying a bike and taking that, or a car). If via automobile, so be it. But due to the ability in place for the gubmint to regulate minimum standards and penalize via restriction/elimination of one's license to do so, it's deemed a privilege.

    Yet with the 1A, 2A and all the protections in place regarding some basic rights of a person we've said exist and shall be protected from infringement, it's a certainty that what 38special is saying is true: these most definitely can be taken away, just as surely as a driver's license. In that sense, practically speaking, it's little more than a privilege. In that very real sense, we're deluding ourselves to believe there's much practical difference between a right and privilege, when might makes right.

    Don't get me wrong, I think the concept that a gubmint that takes from its people in such ways is one that has gone far beyond rights down the path of authority into the realm of power only. The rights still exist if taken away, sure, but in what practical sense do they then hold any place in our daily lives (if so taken from us)?

    That said ...

    This sort of thing is at the root of tyranny. It's why the break from Britain occurred. It's why the Declaration was so clearly stated. The grievances were so unbearably deep that it's why the Constitution was worded the way it was, recognizing existing rights of the person that SHALL NOT BE TAKEN by temporary governing hirelings. (Though, as 38special points out, should enough of the people allow their reps to alter the Amendments, surely the rules will change at that point. But until then ...)

    Beware your rights, your preexisting rights, the rights upon which our states were founded and for which so much blood was shed to protect, which millions are screaming and striving to take from you ... cold, dead hands or otherwise. Beware, lest you lose them just as surely as the sun will "rises."
    TX expat and bombthrower77 like this.
    Your best weapon is your brain. Don't leave home without it.
    Thoughts: Justifiable self defense (A.O.J.).
    Explain: How does disarming victims reduce the number of victims?
    Reason over Force: The Gun is Civilization (Marko Kloos).
    NRA, SAF, GOA, OFF, ACLDN.

Page 4 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Search tags for this page

charlton heston bear arms
,
charlton heston ill give you my gun
,
charlton heston nra cold dead hands
,
charlton heston nra quote
,
charlton heston's gun vault
,

is what we're up against

,
list states that oppose awb
,
protected by the 2nd amendment sign
,

the awb violates the 2nd amendment

,
they don't have the votes for awb
,
what does this mean -do you agree that the second amendment gives citizens the right to own and bear guns without infrin
,
why is it so important to appose gun control
Click on a term to search for related topics.