Gun Control Debate - Haymarket, VA

Discuss the national Gun Control debate in Haymarket, VA.

Would you support a ban on handguns?

Haymarket opposes
Oppose
 
48
Support
 
26

Vote now in Haymarket:

First Prev
of 10
Next Last
Wolf

Gainesville, VA

#1 Mar 31, 2012
2nd amedment isnt up for debate
Tom

United States

#2 Mar 31, 2012
The 2nd Amendment is for guns in the militia. Read it.
Packin

United States

#3 Mar 31, 2012
Tom wrote:
The 2nd Amendment is for guns in the militia. Read it.
It says the right of the PEOPLE not army, militia, government, and not because Tom said so. Read it again. Maybe if you would read some other writings of the founding fathers you would know just what they meant. The intention was for the PEOPLE to be armed in case the government got too oppressive and needed to be kept in check. The BILL OF RIGHTS were put there as prohibitions on the government NOT the PEOPLE. These are RIGHTS the government is prohibited (hands off, don't touch, can't mess with) from altering.
Joe

Connellsville, PA

#4 Apr 1, 2012
Tom wrote:
The 2nd Amendment is for guns in the militia. Read it.
Read the United States code, you're part of the militia.
Wolf

Gainesville, VA

#5 Apr 1, 2012
@ Tom - I am tolerant of everything in this world with the exception of ignorance. I hope that less than average IQ of yours works out for you.
Advark

Gainesville, VA

#6 Apr 1, 2012
Again, the 2nd amendment is NOT up for debate.
Just a thought

Gainesville, VA

#7 Apr 1, 2012
Tom wrote:
The 2nd Amendment is for guns in the militia. Read it.
Tom -
In the context of the time the Constitution was written, the "militia" was clearly the armed citizenry. The "militia" is referred to ad nauseum by our founding fathers as the people, as in...We The People - not some highly regulated national guard, but "well regulated," i.e. law-abiding citizens. Our inalienable right is further clarified by the subsequent phrase "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." Is that so hard to accept? It seems to preclude any further arguments, unless you choose to argue to remove our 2nd fundamental right.

Take a look at the crime levels of cities with the strictest gun control imposed on law-abiding citizens - Chicago, Philadelphia, D.C., Los Angeles, Baltimore, New Orleans... Now tell me "gun control" hasn't contributed to their record level murder and violent crime rates.

Firearm ownership by law-abiding citizens puts them on an equal footing with armed and dangerous criminals, who don't care about the legality of having firearms. Think of places with a high level of civilian firearm ownership like Canada and Switzerland...pretty safe places.

Tom, I bet even you would wish you had a handgun if you ever ended up in danger from an armed criminal. Then it would be too late to change your position. Think about it.
Law

Omaha, NE

#8 Apr 1, 2012
Tom wrote:
The 2nd Amendment is for guns in the militia. Read it.
Is that right? Why don't YOU reread it. It doesn't say what you say it does.
Oy Vey

Frederick, MD

#9 Apr 2, 2012
Wolf wrote:
@ Tom - I am tolerant of everything in this world with the exception of ignorance. I hope that less than average IQ of yours works out for you.
So.. liking and owning guns is proof of a high iq?
I'm skeptical.
Packin

Oxford, MS

#10 Apr 2, 2012
Oy Vey wrote:
<quoted text>
So.. liking and owning guns is proof of a high iq?
I'm skeptical.
Do you like or own a gun? If not perhaps you don't have enough I.Q. to understand.
Law

Omaha, NE

#11 Apr 2, 2012
Oy Vey wrote:
<quoted text>
So.. liking and owning guns is proof of a high iq?
I'm skeptical.
No, pointing out Tom's apparent lack of reading and comprehension skills is an indicator of his lower than it should be IQ. Obviously comprehension isn't your forte either.
Wolf

Gainesville, VA

#12 Apr 4, 2012
Oy Vey wrote:
<quoted text>
So.. liking and owning guns is proof of a high iq?
I'm skeptical.
The ability to understand the second amendment is proof.
Clappy

Manassas, VA

#13 Apr 11, 2012
Saying, "2nd amedment isnt up for debate" isn't too bright. Article 5 of the Constitution explains exactly that the amendments ARE up for debate! Someone needs a civics class refresher! LOL
Wolf wrote:
<quoted text>The ability to understand the second amendment is proof.
Louiston

Des Moines, IA

#14 Apr 11, 2012
Clappy wrote:
Saying, "2nd amedment isnt up for debate" isn't too bright. Article 5 of the Constitution explains exactly that the amendments ARE up for debate! Someone needs a civics class refresher! LOL
<quoted text>
Why isn't it "too bright", Cappy? How does the 5th Article address modifying the 2nd Amendment directly? When has ANY Amendment limited another other than the issue with the 18th & 21st Amendments?
Clappy

Manassas, VA

#15 Apr 11, 2012
Its not too bright because you said an amendment of the Constitution was "not up for debate," when the crux - the beauty - of the Constitution is that it outlines the process by which it can be changed. So when you said that it wasn't up for debate, you said it in the face of more than 200 years of our Constitution being hailed for everything being up for debate. That's not too bright.

Also you challenged me to name "ANY Amendment" limiting another... and then you answered that challenge! You are talking in circles and proving my point all at once! Welcome to America - its all up for debate!
Louiston wrote:
<quoted text>Why isn't it "too bright", Cappy? How does the 5th Article address modifying the 2nd Amendment directly? When has ANY Amendment limited another other than the issue with the 18th & 21st Amendments?
Clappy

Manassas, VA

#16 Apr 11, 2012
Sorry - wolf said it wasn't up for debate, not you.
Louiston wrote:
<quoted text>Why isn't it "too bright", Cappy? How does the 5th Article address modifying the 2nd Amendment directly? When has ANY Amendment limited another other than the issue with the 18th & 21st Amendments?
Law

Omaha, NE

#17 Apr 11, 2012
Clappy wrote:
Its not too bright because you said an amendment of the Constitution was "not up for debate," when the crux - the beauty - of the Constitution is that it outlines the process by which it can be changed. So when you said that it wasn't up for debate, you said it in the face of more than 200 years of our Constitution being hailed for everything being up for debate. That's not too bright.
Also you challenged me to name "ANY Amendment" limiting another... and then you answered that challenge! You are talking in circles and proving my point all at once! Welcome to America - its all up for debate!
<quoted text>
I'm confused. How is the 2nd Amendment up for debate? And by whom?
Law

Omaha, NE

#18 Apr 11, 2012
Louiston wrote:
<quoted text>Why isn't it "too bright", Cappy? How does the 5th Article address modifying the 2nd Amendment directly? When has ANY Amendment limited another other than the issue with the 18th & 21st Amendments?
Well, technically the 18th Amendment was the one with limitations. Unlike the wishes of the Founding Fathers, the 18th Amendment was a resriction on rights and liberties instead of an expansion.
Unforunately it took polluticians almost 15 years to right a wrong. In the mean time, an entire underbelly of crime was created that could have been forseen before the Amendment was first passed.
Even Andrew Volstead for whom the Volstrad Act is named wasn't for prohbiition and was in fact a proponent of civil rights and civil rights legislation but having to bring up the sponsored bill up to Congress. An act with his name on it cost him his job. He wasn't re-elected.
.
But don't think for a moment that the current polluticians learned their lesson. They don't bat an eye offering up legislation that further erodes liberty...of course always under the guise of "the common good" or "general welfare".
Clappy

Manassas, VA

#19 Apr 11, 2012
I thought I was clear. By the Constitution itself. You can carry on with your gun debate - I'm not even commenting on that. The Constitution is built for change, it is it's most famed accomplishment. Am I missing something? Do modern day "Constitutionalists" think that it is iron-clad?
Law wrote:
<quoted text>I'm confused. How is the 2nd Amendment up for debate? And by whom?
Joe

United States

#20 Apr 11, 2012
Clappy wrote:
I thought I was clear. By the Constitution itself. You can carry on with your gun debate - I'm not even commenting on that. The Constitution is built for change, it is it's most famed accomplishment. Am I missing something? Do modern day "Constitutionalists" think that it is iron-clad?
<quoted text>
The constitution doesn't grant rights, it simply is a statement of them. The Bill of Rights especially, which state the natural rights that we all have from the moment we breath air. IMO, it's those that shouldn't be 'changed'. I'd think when our Founding Fathers drafted the Constitution, they didn't have freedom of speech or self-incrimination in mind when they inserted the mechanics to change it.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 10
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.

Haymarket Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
New Towncenter in Gainesville VA (Sep '06) Mar 28 Asgoodasgold 5,282
please recommend dentists in Gainesville (Nov '07) Mar 28 Sherry 59
Fundraiser in Gainesville VA Today at Chico's i... Mar 28 Kevin Rychlik 1
Boosterthon Prince William County Schools (Sep '11) Mar 26 NewHorizon 14
6th Annual Gainesville 5K - Sat. April 18th Mar 19 GVMS 1
Lake Manassas Academy or Chesterbrook Academy (Oct '11) Mar 16 Rukia 10
Parks at Piedmont (Sep '08) Mar 10 Poppy 416

Related Topics

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]