Gun Control Debate - Arnold, MO

Discuss the national Gun Control debate in Arnold, MO.

Would you support a ban on handguns?

Arnold opposes
Oppose
 
29
Support
 
1

Vote now in Arnold:

First Prev
of 3
Next Last
Law

La Vista, NE

#42 Jul 18, 2013
Music Lover wrote:
Just so I'm clear, you're saying common sense is the touchstone by which we as a society should decide which weapons citizens should own? Spread out over 300 million Americans that's a pretty vague standard.
Not at all.
Music Lover wrote:
For example, personally I don't think there's any common sense reason to own a large capacity magazine. Do you?
Where there is a right,'reason' is not relevant. The vast majority of firearm-related crime does not involve so called "large capacity magazines"
Music Lover wrote:
If just the two of us can't agree on what a standard of common sense would allow in this context how do you expect the rest of the country to? We need to be a little more specific in what makes a weapon beyond the pale.
Are you a firearms expert?
Music Lover wrote:
The economics of producing WMD aren't any deterrent.
Huh??? What do you define as a WMD?
Music Lover wrote:
There are many people who have the means to either build or buy chemical or biological weapons.(Which is why, of course, that they're called "the poor man's atomic bomb").
If that were the case, why is there not a proliferation of their use?
Music Lover wrote:
The Federation of American Scientists estimates that it would cost about $25 million to produce sarin and other nerve agents in militarily significant quantities. That's chump change for a lot of people in America.
A lot? How many is a lot? That's a very nebuolus claim.
Music Lover wrote:
Maybe you and I can't afford them. But for $25 million Jane Fonda, Donald Trump, the Koch brothers, Kobe Bryant, Rush Limbaugh, Al Gore, and probably even Justin Bieber could have their own private stockpile.
Damn! When you go off on a tangent, you leave the atmosphere!! LOL
Music Lover wrote:
How do you feel about that? Protected by the 2nd Amendment?
Are you REALLY this dense?
Music Lover wrote:
Can we agree that the 2nd Amendment wasn't drafted by the Founders to allow The Biebs the freedom to possess any type of WMD?
Keep rolling out those strawmen.
Music Lover wrote:
I find your response to my last point, that even the First Amendment should be limited in certain limited circumstances a little ironical. You say, "When your [otherwise constitutionally protected] actions (shouting Fire! in a crowded movie theater) affect another negatively and especially physically, that should be restricted."
That is not a restrictionof the 1st Amendment. Or can yo ushow me where the word "fire" appears in the 1st Amendment?
Music Lover wrote:
Why is the 2nd Amendment exempt from that same type of reasoning?
Because it specifically says "shall not be infringed".
Music Lover wrote:
So we can fight off a tyrannical government which has access to unlimited supplies of vastly superior weapons? That's ridiculous.
Now you're REALLY showing your ignorance.
First, you have no idea how much firepower is in the hnds of the citizenry.
Second, you're assuming that all memebrs of the military will follow the orders to shoot on their own families and friends.
Third, you ignore that the veteran to active personnel ratio is somewhere between 9.5-12 to 1. That's a hell of a lot of people that already know the military's secrets, tactics, and resource locations.
Fourth, you forget who arms the military. The civilian industry. But you just assume that civilians will keep on manufacturing the very armaments that they know will some day be iused on themselves. An idiot would believe that.
Law

La Vista, NE

#43 Jul 18, 2013
Fifth, you think the same military that couldn't find an itinerant bedouin in a country the size of Texas is going to be able to put down a determined citizenry.
Sixth, do you not remember how the Russians fared in Afghanistan?
Finally, you honestly believe the government would turn their back away from all of the other countries they have a military presence or interst in to fight a protracted batle iwht their own citizenry?
You really know how to jump to some wild conclusions.
Music Lover wrote:
I'm still waiting for someone to set out a bright line test. You just gave one for the First Amendment. I liked it.
You liked it because you don't understand the fact that yelling "Fire" in a crowded theater is NOT a restriction on the 1st Amendment.
Music Lover wrote:
Can we apply the same test to the right to bear arms?
No.
Music Lover wrote:
I'm really not totally against the right of people to protect themselves. It's where to draw the line on the equipment they can use to do it that fascinates me.
Then keep the discussion on arms as understood by the founders during the ratification and not ordnance.
It's funny how much trust you put in a government that you yourself used in a scenario of it becoming tyrannical.
Law

La Vista, NE

#44 Jul 18, 2013
Music Lover wrote:
<quoted text>
Willie, don't hurt yourself trying to come up with any more insightful aphorisms. Let me help you out by providing a few I found on another website. Try to remember as many of them as you can. The next time you get into a discussion about the 2nd Amendment - say, while you're standing outside your favorite movie house at midnight waiting for the next showing of Batman - you can use them to impress your friends.
An armed man is a citizen. An unarmed man is a subject.
A gun in the hand is better than a cop on the phone.
Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface.
Gun control is not about guns; it's about control.
If guns are outlawed, can we use grenades?
If guns cause crime, then pencils cause misspelled words.
Free men do not ask permission to bear arms.
If you don't know your rights you don't have any.
Those who trade liberty for security have neither.
The United States Constitution (c) 1791. All Rights Reserved.
What part of "shall not be infringed" do you not understand?
The Second Amendment is in place in case they ignore the others.
84,999,987 firearm owners killed no one yesterday.
Guns only have two enemies: Rust and Politicians.
Know guns, know peace and safety. No guns, no peace nor safety.
You don't shoot to kill; you shoot to stay alive.
911 - Government sponsored Dial a Prayer.
Assault is a behavior, not a device.
Criminals love gun control - it makes their jobs safer.
If Guns cause Crime, then Matches cause Arson.
Only a government that is afraid of its citizens tries to control them.
You only have the rights you are willing to fight for.
When you remove the people's right to bear arms, you create slaves.
The American Revolution would never have happened with Gun Control.
"...A government by the people, for the people..."
Almost as many as the strawmen you've propped up.
Music Lover

Saint Louis, MO

#45 Jul 19, 2013
If the First Amendment says "Congress shall make no law ... abridging the freedom of speech" how can the government forbid me to shout "Fire!" in a movie theatre?
Law

La Vista, NE

#47 Jul 19, 2013
Music Lover wrote:
If the First Amendment says "Congress shall make no law ... abridging the freedom of speech" how can the government forbid me to shout "Fire!" in a movie theatre?
The government can't forbid you from yelling "Fire!" in a crowded theater.
Law

La Vista, NE

#48 Jul 19, 2013
Answers wrote:
It's actually "FALSELY shouting fire in a crowded theater".
When people say that there are restrictions on the First Amendment, they donít understand what theyíre saying. Sure, there are restrictions on what you can say, but there is always the presumption of innocence.
Actually that is not entirely true. There is no restriction on what you can say.
Answers wrote:
Itís only in reaction to an act or speech that those restrictions kick in.
Exactly right. And that something that most people don't understand.
The utterance of "Fire" in a crowded theater when in fact there is no fire is not a restriction of the 1st Amendment.
What seems to be misunderstood is that we have rights that others (including the government) cannot infringe on. I don't have the right to cause you harm nor you to me. I can yell "Fire!" in a crowded theater but I am not free from prosecution as the result of inciting mayhem. Why? I infringed on the rights of the patrons of that theater. Not the same as saying that my action goes against restritions of the 1st Amendment.
The key is whether my speech is "protected" free speech. Protection from government reprisal, prosecution, or subjugation.
In the case of yelling "Fire" in a crowded theater, my speech is not protected because I am held liable for the harm done.
Answers wrote:
We should have the same kinds of restrictions on the Second Amendment.
No, we should not have the same kinds of restrictons in the 2nd Amendment.
Answers wrote:
Just as with the First, you should have the full and complete enjoyment of your rights without any reservations or restrictions until you do something that proves your motives are against the public interest. Like murder, for example.
Again, that is NOT a restriction of the 2nd Amendment. When you talk about murder, that is infringement on the rights of another. Rights don't grant you that ability.
Answers wrote:
I should be able to walk down Broadway in New York City with a fully automatic grenade launcher all locked and loaded, and have it be completely legal until the moment I pull the trigger.
Up until the moment that you use a gun for evil purposes, there should be no restrictions on your rights. Just as with the First Amendment.
So I completely agree. The restrictions on the Second Amendment should be identical in nature to those on the First.
In that neither Amendment has restrictions, I agree.
Answers wrote:
That you should have complete and total freedom until you prove you arenít responsible enough to handle that responsibility.
Because ďinnocent until proven guiltyĒ isnít just a phrase ó itís supposed to actually mean something in this country.
Exactly right. That is more than addressed with "Due Process".
Music Lover

Saint Louis, MO

#49 Jul 19, 2013
Answers wrote:
I should be able to walk down Broadway in New York City with a fully automatic grenade launcher all locked and loaded, and have it be completely legal until the moment I pull the trigger.
I thought we had a pretty good debate going on here but you've moved from the real world into LaPierre Land. It makes feel dirty just thinking about it. Good luck to you when the black helicopters come. Give 'em hell.
Law

La Vista, NE

#50 Jul 19, 2013
Music Lover wrote:
<quoted text>
I thought we had a pretty good debate going on here but you've moved from the real world into LaPierre Land. It makes feel dirty just thinking about it. Good luck to you when the black helicopters come. Give 'em hell.
More tripe from a Brady Bunch sycophant. As usual he/she soils his/her pink thong when the concept of rights and liberties is brought up.
Mike

Saint Peters, MO

#51 Jul 20, 2013
Handguns are for self defense. Self Defense is a human right.
Mr_Awesome

United States

#52 Jul 24, 2013
This is America. I wouldn't wanna see this world when the government tries to ban our weapons.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 3
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Arnold Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
MO Ferguson Police Chief Just Shocked Everyone Wit... 2 min redeemer 576
MO Who do you support for U.S. Senate in Missouri ... (Oct '10) 8 min Yellow Dawg Democrat 97,270
MO Ferguson Police Are Being Relieved Of Their Dut... 1 hr redeemer 3,169
Fox C6 Board of Education : Discussion 1 hr Doris Borgelt 502
MO Powerful Photos Blast The Media's Portrayal Of ... 12 hr FyI 304
County Councilman Boyer 15 hr Doris Borgelt 108
Who is better for the people of Arnold? 15 hr Doris Borgelt 14
Fox High School Superintendent (Sep '10) 16 hr XIAO 1,456

Related Topics

Arnold Jobs

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]