Are ANY Gun Laws Legal?

[Tennessee Gentleman]

Sorry, I WON'T get over it.

Tuttle, you know there have been gun control laws since the country was founded? Do you think there should be none?

Where do you get this assumption? I haven't seen one post that supports your case.

And while I don't believe that a machine gun is dangerous or unusual but an RPG or hand grenade probably is.

The 2A, last I checked, was talking about firearms.

Where would you draw the line at what is a firearm? That can cover a lot. Some contend that since warships and cannon could be privately owned back then that all modern military weapons today should be protected. And this quote:

'NO LAW" MEANS NO LAW, PERIOD. No slippery slope, no restrictions. I believe Scalia, Thomas, and a few others have the same view...

to me would indicate that it would be up to the individual to decide what a firearm is so why not WMD?

 

[Glenn E. Meyer]

Thanks for the clarification of what I said, TNG - I was off being a refined academic.

The restrictions on publishing birth control information were clearly a case of using federal law to control speech in an instance which clearly related to hurting people in some minds but not others. It was an instance of trying to constrain behaviors that may or not be harmful. Condoms - harmful or positive?

The folks who want to limit expression with anti flag burning amendments clearly indicated that some want to use the force of the federal government to control political dissent.

One argument on banning obscenity / control of violent media that is not produced illegality is the prediction that such depictions pose a generative risk to society. They will encourage bad behavior.

The limitations on extremely dangerous weaponery is that such weapons pose an exponential increase in risk if misused. That's the rationale for the full auto restrictions.

The nitrate or WMD example is a subtle and refined point. Folks argue that owning various things such not be banned as they are 'arms'. But arms evolved. The founders didn't know from full auto Glock 18s. Maybe we will have laser guns someday. Should we rewrite the 2nd to say - no laws controlling weapons based on the current gun powder techniques of 2009. So when the United Federation of Planets decides to ban hand held phasers, you would be ok with that?

BTW, if the Constitution is absolute - how come we have amendments?

Those guys who made senators elected directly were traitors?

 

[Tennessee Gentleman]

The only restrictions on free speech involve using speech in ways that hurt others

And firearms don't "hurt" others? If "hurting others" is a reasonable criteria for regulation then guns would be first in line don't you think?

 

[Socrates]

No. Cars. Drugs. Illegal immigrants. And, the real ones, criminals.

 

[Tennessee Gentleman]

Cars. Drugs. Illegal immigrants. And, the real ones, criminals.

All of which are heavily regulated, licensed and sanctioned in the case of criminals or misuse. Why then can't guns be as well? How can mere words hurt someone but a firearm can't?

 

[Brian Pfleuger]

I'm just curious. Has anyone ever been involved in this type of discussion and actually had the other person change their mind?

It is an interesting exchange of ideas but it does seem to get pointless after awhile.

 

[Tennessee Gentleman]

It is an interesting exchange of ideas but it does seem to get pointless after awhile.

Maybe not so pointless.

As to your first question, I know I will never change Socrates or Webelymkv's mind for instance. They won't change mine either and in fact debating with them has forced me to more carefully consider my views with thought and evidence where before it was more a gut feeling. I still have the same views but they are better thought out now.

However, I recently told Glenn Meyer that one time I was googling a question about some thing on here we were discussing and lo and behold google sent me to a TFL thread. Now, I think the discussion is good for lurkers and those who genuinely want to learn about gun issues. I think our debates provide them with food for thought and it is important to show gun owners have lots of different opinions. Makes us look like we are, regular folks.

So yeah, I think it is worth it and let the readers decide what they believe.

 

[Glenn E. Meyer]

The rational can change their opinion based on evidence. The emotional usually don't.

There are two routes to persuasion. If you adopt the view that you will examine evidence then you are open to changing your mind.

In debates like this we usually see a default to emotional. Someone will call someone a Brady or a Liberal soon and then we can lock it down.

 

[Socrates]

It's real simple. The bad guys always have the weapons they want, or can get them, and, until we seriously try and close our borders, always will. We live in a time when gangs far out number police. They have arms, and, they don't care about any laws.

As law abiding citizens we are at a distinct disadvantage, because we actually try and follow the laws. All I want is the right to own, and protect myself from outlaws, and gangs.

Our basic problem is we elect attorneys, who think that by writing laws they solve problems, or protect people, when, in fact, most of the time they don't, and, their actions limit our freedoms.

Kali is the future of the US, so here are just a few laws.
They don't trust me with hot water. My faucets now come with a 120 degree governor, so I can't get really hot water, by law.

I can't take a shower with over a certain amount of flow, again a law.

They tell me what kind of gas cap I have to put on my car, and, I have to spend 1500 dollars to get my car to pass a smog standard, when in fact half the state is exempt, and, my Toyota has a 1.5 liter engine, which for a long time, was the smallest offered in any car.

As for gun laws. No lead bullets in areas with Condors?
No .50 BMG rifles. No assault rifles, pretty much. Can't even buy an AR 15. No magazines over 10 rounds, pistol or rifle. etc.

All of these laws were made from one, hideous public case, as a general rule, and, the politicians write them to justify their existence. One scalded child in a bathtub, by a bad mother, no hot water for 30 million people.

Wait until you are in a gunshop, and, the LEO's walk in, and, the guys start pulling out the guns that LEO can buy, and normal folks can't, because it hasn't passed the arbitrary 'drop' test setup by our super hippy liberal AG.

We are limited currently to 1343 guns 'approved' for purchase.

http://certguns.doj.ca.gov/

I just had to pay 25 dollars for a license to buy a gun, and, pass a stupid firearms test. It was supposed to be for life, but, now you have to redo it every 5 years...

Big Sisters are here, and, they rule in Kalifornia.

 

[Wildalaska]

Big Brother is here, and, he rules in Kalifornia.

Unfortunately all of your examples don't demonstrate the somewhat cliched Big Brother reference

WildbutheyimjustaLIBERALSHEEPLETRAITORthatsjustajokeforyouGlenAlaska ™

 

[Socrates]

HMMM.
How about this? 14 pages of guns have recently been taken off the 'approved list' in Kali.

FOUR GUNS are on the recently approved list.

Ken, your quick hit and run doesn't provide an explanation of why you think these limitations on our freedom, interstate commerce, supposedly reserved to be an area under Federal Jurisdiction, by the commerce Clause, aren't evidence of illegal laws?

By the way, I think these forums, and such discussions are vital to a free society. The exchange of ideas, the exchange of information, and the difference state to state is vital to the survival of our gun rights. Kali sends Pelosi, Fienstien and Boxer to congress, and, and, with that, it's clear I should amend the above to Big Sisters.

If TG is a true 'liberal', he will evaluate the information presented with an open mind, and, reevaluate his position, as more evidence becomes clear.

I grew up in Kali, and, at one point was taught the Pelosi/Fienstien/Boxer Constitution in our public schools. Same at UCSC. However, when in college and taking International law, it became real clear that the government with the largest guns has always been able to write International Laws, and, set the rules for the world.

Also, I learned from a couple veterans the joy of our Second Amendment right, and their view that firearms were vital to our security, both individual, and collective.

This came into clear focus on January 1st, 1982, where torential rains knocked power out for 3 days, and, we were on our own. We got together, protected our restaurant, and came through just fine. During this time we did hear gun shots in the area, and, the police came to investigate.
Between the dogs, our former veterans, we came out of it just fine. I would NOT have liked being helpless, unable to protect ourselves against armed attackers, when we were sitting on 150 grand in frozen lobster, and, a safe full of money.

 

[Tennessee Gentleman]

The bad guys always have the weapons they want, or can get them, and, until we seriously try and close our borders, always will. We live in a time when gangs far out number police. They have arms, and, they don't care about any laws.

I agree. Don't know about the gangs outnumbering police. I guess that depends wher you are. But I pretty much agree.

As law abiding citizens we are at a distinct disadvantage, because we actually try and follow the laws. All I want is the right to own, and protect myself from outlaws, and gangs.

I agree here again (this is spooky) We are further at a disadvantage because we generally have more to lose that is dear to us then a criminal. I fully support self defense and keeping and bearing arms.

Kali is the future of the US, so here are just a few laws.

Well, I hope not but I do acknowledge that the world is getting more "complicated" and things that were easy and simple when I was a child are not so much anymore. Not sure what to say about some of that.

Big Brother is here, and, he rules in Kalifornia.

No disagreement there. I always said CA was a nice place to visit but not to live. I would move to Tennessee We like guns!

 

[Socrates]

I agree. Don't know about the gangs outnumbering police. I guess that depends wher you are. But I pretty much agree.

TG:
I've had information from a joint conference by LEO, state and Federal, concerning gangs. In the western 13 states, in 2000, it was estimated the gang members out numbered police 5 to 1.

They don't usually make much noise, but, on certain situations they do.

The Rodney King riots were orchestrated by a number of gangs. What happened was at a certain time, fires were lit all over L.A. all at the same time. LEO and Fire were driven out of the area by rifle and pistol fire, leaving no law in the L.A. area. The gangs looted at will, redistributing substantial wealth. Major stores just cleaned out, and, some burned to cover their tracks.

The only real defense was communities banding together, and shooting back. The Koreans got in trouble, since they used roof tops, and shot looters from there, on TV, thanks to the choppers.

Other communities, noteably West Hollywood(large gay population with serious belief in freedom)
, brought out barricades, rifles, shotguns, anything they had, and stopped anyone from coming out of the major L.A. area that looked like gang bangers. Brentwood, Pacific Palisaides, all did the same, and, stopped looting in their area, and worse, by force of arms. Police did nothing really, too much area, too few police.

Semi-auto and full auto weapons had a place in such situations. The threat of an M-60, or a Ma Duce would make a car full of gang members think twice about opening fire with their Mac 10's, and AK 47's.

Heck, even a few M-14's with 20 round mags would make them seriously consider another area.

 

[Wildalaska]

Ken, your quick hit and run doesn't provide an explanation of why you think these limitations on our freedom, interstate commerce, supposedly reserved to be an area under Federal Jurisdiction, by the commerce Clause, aren't evidence of illegal laws?

Hot water? Water usage? Smog laws? Thats Big Brother?

WildisntthatabitoverwroughtAlaska ™

 

[Socrates]

You don't make the connection that if the legislature doesn't trust me with hot water, how do you think they feel about guns?

Also, go here, look at home many guns are coming off the list, and how many are going on...

http://certguns.doj.ca.gov/

Recently Added Handgun Models

Recently Removed Handguns

By the way, Commerce, interstate, is any area of law that is reserved for the Federal Government. Any law effecting that has to face the Supremacy Clause, and should be overturned, since it appears Congress is authorized to do just about anything, short of the Lopez case.

 

[Tennessee Gentleman]

Hot water? Water usage? Smog laws? Thats Big Brother?

I think "nanny state" is probably the term used most of the time that I hear. I believe in Europe they tax fatty foods more than other types.

Heck, even a few M-14's with 20 round mags would make them seriously consider another area.

Oh, I don't know if you would even need those. I am not an expert on riots but I have seen mobs in action and from what I saw they were mostly opportunists who did not want to die for your TV. Even a decent hunting rifle, bolt or lever action would make them tend to look elsewhere IMO.

 

[Socrates]

TG:

That, I'm pretty sure is what most had. These gangs are not doing stuff by chance. They plan out an attack, load a car up,
6 guys, armed to the hilt, and drive into an area, target the house, rob, rape, murder, kidnap, etc. Mac 10's and AK 47's, full auto, Tech 9's, all those 'illegal' guns they have.. LAPD is not really ready to mount SWAT operations in these areas. Getting in and out without being targeted, and noted, is impossible.

There are certain beaches in LA that are now banger beaches, and, you better stay the heck off that beach...

The latest trend is the gangs are having members enlist, since many have clean records, and, they now bring home military tactics to street wars, and, police encounters.

 

[Wildalaska]

You don't make the connection that if the legislature doesn't trust me with hot water, how do you think they feel about guns?

Move if you dont like it. Thats what your fellow citizens want. There is nothing Big Brother about hot water laws, just like adulterated foods, water quality rules, etc. Does it have a rational relation to the health safety and welfare of the public? Is it an unreasonable burden?

Guns have nothing to do with it.

WildthereisyourrighttohotwaterAlaska ™

 

[Socrates]

Under discussion is the Kali 'list', which conflicts with the Commerce Clause, by restricting interstate commerce, in this case guns.

 

[Shane Tuttle]

Tuttle, you know there have been gun control laws since the country was founded? Do you think there should be none?

Which specific laws? I'm thinking two wrongs don't make a right. Why weren't they introduced into the BOR? I really don't think we need much of any. I know you're viewpoint on full autos. I'm not bent out of shape that there's restrictions on full autos. But I personally would rather see it abolished. Seeing that I don't consider WMDs, etc. to be a firearm, the govt. can restrict all they want...and they should. I'm presuming laws as far as possession only.

Where would you draw the line at what is a firearm? That can cover a lot. Some contend that since warships and cannon could be privately owned back then that all modern military weapons today should be protected.

My personal opinion? One that you can handle on your own without the aid of a vehicle.

BTW, if the Constitution is absolute - how come we have amendments?
Those guys who made senators elected directly were traitors?

Like I said, my version of absolute may be hypocritical. Amendments were part of the process of forming our government. During the infant stages, IIRC, it was necessary for directly elected senators. Like Mike Irwin stated, they didn't just jot down the COTUS and BOR and call it good. I understand the growing pains such as slavery and womens' suffrage. But we're a well established country now and have proven data that many additional gun laws do not work.

Most know the cliche. When a talented sports team hits a losing streak, the coach stops the play schemes and goes back to the fundamentals. We NEED to get back to the fundamentals.

Folks argue that owning various things such not be banned as they are 'arms'. But arms evolved. The founders didn't know from full auto Glock 18s. Maybe we will have laser guns someday. Should we rewrite the 2nd to say - no laws controlling weapons based on the current gun powder techniques of 2009. So when the United Federation of Planets decides to ban hand held phasers, you would be ok with that?

And what crime has really been committed with a Glock 18? My point is just because it fires more bullets per minute than a musket doesn't mean there should be restrictions. And, no, I don't think I'd be OK with banning of hand held phasers.

I'm just curious. Has anyone ever been involved in this type of discussion and actually had the other person change their mind?
It is an interesting exchange of ideas but it does seem to get pointless after awhile.

I mostly agree with TG on this one. I can see your point, but definitely disagree with it being pointless. Think of having a discussion in person. Do you only make a couple of statements and end the conversation? NOT ME! I love to have civil debates and discussions on topics that I don't know a lot about. Whether I have a formed opinion or not, I still take in what others have to say and analize the discussion at a later time. Depending on the person, I don't think it's a battle of who's right. Just a healthy discussion...that's all...