Originally posted by Firefly218
Founding Fathers might’ve imagined the advancement of weapon technology, but they also must’ve then imagined that in the future the law would be adjusted accordingly.Behaving like a law passed in the 18th century should be one-size-fits-all applicable without any updating or adjustment to all future generations is ridiculous. Times change
Agreed on the first part. It would also be very dishonest and even ignorant to pretend they intended the US Constitution to remain exactly the same especially considering how divisive the topics - of slavery, taxes, regulation, Federal and Reserved power - were.
Originally Post by Firefly218
Behaving like a law passed in the 18th century should be one-size-fits-all applicable without any updating or adjustment to all future generations is ridiculous.
I partially agree with this. This is why nuclear weapons and automatic firearms should probably not be accessible to the common citizen.
I've been argued against, from libertarians, that my position is still wrong. But I am not comfortable enough to allow regular US Citizens access to nuclear weapons.
Originally posted by dadudemon
I'll sum-up: the "musket" argument (that muskets are super slow so the Second Amendment does not apply) that people make about guns is simply dishonest. It is an outright lie to misrepresent Original Intent like that.
Thanks for the sum-up 👆
I didn't take the commercial's intention as "ban all guns! Period!", that's not sensible, just that our laws should probably be updated to coincide with gun technology/advancements; which is sensible.
Originally posted by dadudemonIt was Thomas Jefferson who said that every generation should have a revolution. Clearly change is expected, change is a constant of life. The 2nd amendment made sense in its own time, today it needs restrictions and regulations.
Agreed on the first part. It would also be very dishonest and even ignorant to pretend they intended the US Constitution to remain exactly the same especially considering how divisive the topics - of slavery, taxes, regulation, Federal and Reserved power - were.
Originally posted by Robtard
Thanks for the sum-up 👆I didn't take the commercial's intention as "ban all guns! Period!", that's not sensible, just that our laws should probably be updated to coincide with gun technology/advancements; which is sensible.
Isn't it funny how you said you knew more than someone else despite posting a video of someone that actually wasn't as informed about the 2nd amendment as the guy in the video you claimed to know more than? You "dusted it off" meaning you've probably used it before. That makes it even funnier.
Originally posted by Surtur
Just admit you want to ban all guns.
All guns should be banned, yes. The sensible plan though is to do it gradually, like by starting to get rid of semi-automatic weapons and work down from there.
Originally posted by Silent Master
That would be an honest stance, but he just wants to ban the rifles. so I'm trying to figure out why he wants to ban rifles, but leave handguns alone.
I'm British so I'm tragically ignorant on guns, but my understanding is that rifles are more deadly than pistols and can fire quicker.
Originally posted by Silent MasterI’m for banning any weaponry that can be used by civilians to inflict mass death. Handguns or rifles, doesn’t matter. I think you knew that and were characteristically being petty.
That would be an honest stance, but he just wants to ban the rifles. so I'm trying to figure out why he wants to ban rifles, but leave handguns alone.
Originally posted by Surtur
Isn't it funny how you said you knew more than someone else despite posting a video of someone that actually wasn't as informed about the 2nd amendment as the guy in the video you claimed to know more than? You "dusted it off" meaning you've probably used it before. That makes it even funnier.
Not at all, cos the intention of the video I posted wasn't what Crowder was apparently talking about. But hey, you tried. Also, don't let it bother you all day that I know more about guns than your boytoy Crowder.
Originally posted by Robtard
Not at all, cos the intention of the video I posted wasn't what Crowder was apparently talking about. But hey, you tried. Also, don't let it bother you all day that I know more about guns than your boytoy Crowder.
Lol you tried, you posted a video of someone who didn't know what he was talking about. It's okay Rob. You can try to spin it around.
Originally posted by Surtur
How do we go about banning all guns in a way that prevents anyone with criminal intent from getting a single gun illegally?
^ The fool's 'all or nothing' argument. No one is saying all gun crime can be stopped, as it can't, crime will exist. It's lessening the amount of deaths. Surely you knew that, right? Right?
edit: Bash ninja'd me
Originally posted by SurturMake possession of a dangerous weapon a serious penalty and clamp down on all sources of illicit weaponry. These are military grade weapons right, so I’m pretty sure the government has a good handle on manufacturers and distribution.
How do we go about banning all guns in a way that prevents anyone with criminal intent from getting a single gun illegally?
Just make it extremely difficult, extremely expensive and a federal offense to acquire these guns. That will almost definitely prevent the casual mentally ill teenager from getting access to an AR-15 and slaughtering 17 children.