A2SG

Gumby
Jun 17, 2008
7,437
2,362
Massachusetts
✟94,540.00
Country
United States
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
This is where we are headed because we have already given up part of our 2nd amendment right.
» Democrat Official Admits Plan To Confiscate Guns Alex Jones' Infowars: There's a war on for your mind!

Seriously? One city council member in Austin is an official of the Democratic Party?

Dude, stop listening to the paranoia.

The gun control measures being debated in the Senate and in several states are not an attempt to do away with the Second Amendment. Don't forget, that amendment requires gun owners to be "well-regulated".

-- A2SG, the NRA would do well to read that part of the amendment, they tend to forget it's there.....
 
Upvote 0

tulc

loves "SO'S YER MOM!! posts!
May 18, 2002
49,401
18,801
68
✟271,570.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Alex Jones' Infowars is sensationalistic garbage. You need to find credible sources...

The problem is credible sources don't whip up the really good frothy paranoia Mr Jones and his screaming meemie fans enjoy so much. :D
tulc(not to mention boosting gun sales!) ;)
 
Upvote 0

cow451

Standing with Ukraine.
Supporter
May 29, 2012
41,108
24,128
Hot and Humid
✟1,120,276.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Upvote 0

A2SG

Gumby
Jun 17, 2008
7,437
2,362
Massachusetts
✟94,540.00
Country
United States
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
Control guns and you control the population.

And if you don't control guns, you have anarchy.

Is that better?

-- A2SG, if you think so, then perhaps living in a society with other people isn't the life for you....
 
Upvote 0

Panzerkamfwagen

Es braust unser Panzer im Sturmwind dahin.
May 19, 2015
11,005
21
39
✟19,002.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Libertarian
And if you don't control guns, you have anarchy.

Is that better?

-- A2SG, if you think so, then perhaps living in a society with other people isn't the life for you....

We had anarchy in, say, 1903?

:doh:

That's when any ten year old could mail order a Maxim machine gun.
 
Upvote 0

Billnew

Legend
Apr 23, 2004
21,246
1,234
58
Ohio
Visit site
✟35,363.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
CA-Conservatives
We had anarchy in, say, 1903?

:doh:

That's when any ten year old could mail order a Maxim machine gun.
Kids took guns to school too.
Dang, how did the human race survive, kids with machine guns in school.:D
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

OldWiseGuy

Wake me when it's soup.
Supporter
Feb 4, 2006
46,773
10,981
Wisconsin
Visit site
✟960,122.00
Country
United States
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
It is the dream of every government to disarm it's citizens. Even the police, who are sworn to uphold the Constitution, would prefer a disarmed populace and as a group would not only not object to this but would gladly collect the guns.
 
Upvote 0

Jeffwhosoever

Faithful Servant & Seminary Student
Christian Forums Staff
Chaplain
Angels Team
Supporter
Sep 21, 2009
28,129
3,878
Southern US
✟391,077.00
Country
United States
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
Upvote 0

A2SG

Gumby
Jun 17, 2008
7,437
2,362
Massachusetts
✟94,540.00
Country
United States
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
We had anarchy in, say, 1903?

Were guns completely without control then?

That's when any ten year old could mail order a Maxim machine gun.

Did ten year old kids then have no parents? Did they have unlimited funds to order things through the mail?

I'd say there were controls back then, at least enough to prevent these rich, unsupervised ten year olds from mowing down first graders.

-- A2SG, then again, maybe those mass shootings didn't make the papers.....
 
Upvote 0

Panzerkamfwagen

Es braust unser Panzer im Sturmwind dahin.
May 19, 2015
11,005
21
39
✟19,002.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Libertarian
Were guns completely without control then?

At the federal level, yes. Although, now that you mention it..some of the first gun laws in the United States were meant to keep guns out of the hands of the "wrong" people.

Did ten year old kids then have no parents? Did they have unlimited funds to order things through the mail?

I don't know, but if they had saved up enough money, they could certainly order one.

I'd say there were controls back then, at least enough to prevent these rich, unsupervised ten year olds from mowing down first graders.

Or they had responsible parents who properly raised them.

A2SG, then again, maybe those mass shootings didn't make the papers.

What mass shootings?
 
Upvote 0

Glas Ridire

Well-Known Member
Dec 28, 2010
3,151
134
.
✟4,005.00
Faith
Celtic Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Were guns completely without control then?
Apart from the overtly racist gun control laws (people of color barred from possessing arms) in some places, there were no "gun control laws", murder was murder regardless of the tool, assault was assault, robbery was robbery, etc. Prior, all gun control laws were designed to protect KKK members from their intended victims. This is what we are talking about, when Constitutional loyalists talk about the racist roots of gun control. It is history, not opinion.

Did ten year old kids then have no parents?
Contrary, they had parents who taught them responsibility early on, and it wasn't uncommon for children to bring their gun to school so they could bag dinner on the way home.

Did they have unlimited funds to order things through the mail?
Unlimited might be a stretch. There were railroad tycoons and other such industrial super-rich & they had children. . . I think the point was there was no law against it (a child mail ordering a maxim)

I'd say there were controls back then, at least enough to prevent these rich, unsupervised ten year olds from mowing down first graders.
Yuppers, murder was still illegal back then . . . but the controls were social rather than legal. The only gun control laws in that era were based on skin color. Then, democrats allowing people of color to vote was a hot topic back then too. The painfully slow progress (toward equal rights for people of color) was coupled with the rise in KKK memberships all the way into the 1920's. Gun control is Jim Crow's last stand.

-- A2SG, then again, maybe those mass shootings didn't make the papers.....
While it would solidify Sarah Brady's case if there were, and there were even more, than now that we have gun free zones and more infringements on 2nd amendment rights . . . that simply isn't the case. I understand the inclination to revise history, but I don't have the stomach for it, too hard to learn from the past if we rewrite how it went.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

A2SG

Gumby
Jun 17, 2008
7,437
2,362
Massachusetts
✟94,540.00
Country
United States
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
At the federal level, yes.

Well, it's easier to cross state lines now than it was in the 18th century.

Although, now that you mention it..some of the first gun laws in the United States were meant to keep guns out of the hands of the "wrong" people.

Then we're getting better at recognizing who the wrong people are.

I don't know, but if they had saved up enough money, they could certainly order one.

Or they had responsible parents who properly raised them.

Kinda depends on your definition of "responsible", I guess.

What mass shootings?

My point exactly.

-- A2SG, musta missed it...
 
Upvote 0

A2SG

Gumby
Jun 17, 2008
7,437
2,362
Massachusetts
✟94,540.00
Country
United States
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
Apart from the overtly racist gun control laws (people of color barred from possessing arms) in some places, there were no "gun control laws", murder was murder regardless of the tool, assault was assault, robbery was robbery, etc. Prior, all gun control laws were designed to protect KKK members from their intended victims. This is what we are talking about, when Constitutional loyalists talk about the racist roots of gun control. It is history, not opinion.

So we're getting better at it then, since no one is proposing gun control laws based on race.

Contrary, they had parents who taught them responsibility early on, and it wasn't uncommon for children to bring their gun to school so they could bag dinner on the way home.

Life has changed since then.

Unlimited might be a stretch. There were railroad tycoons and other such industrial super-rich & they had children. . . I think the point was there was no law against it (a child mail ordering a maxim)

And cocaine used to be freely available.

Things change.

Yuppers, murder was still illegal back then . . . but the controls were social rather than legal. The only gun control laws in that era were based on skin color. Then, democrats allowing people of color to vote was a hot topic back then too. The painfully slow progress (toward equal rights for people of color) was coupled with the rise in KKK memberships all the way into the 1920's. Gun control is Jim Crow's last stand.

No longer, since we're not basing it on race any more.

While it would solidify Sarah Brady's case if there were, and there were even more, than now that we have gun free zones and more infringements on 2nd amendment rights . . . that simply isn't the case. I understand the inclination to revise history, but I don't have the stomach for it, too hard to learn from the past if we rewrite how it went.

I'm not trying to rewrite history, I just don't know about these mass shootings that you refer to.

The fact is, today in 2013, assault weapons are too freely available to people who shouldn't have them. That needs to change.

-- A2SG, if you don't like the ideas we've come up with, feel free to suggest your own...but "more guns" is all I hear, and that isn't a solution, that's the problem......
 
Upvote 0

Jeffwhosoever

Faithful Servant & Seminary Student
Christian Forums Staff
Chaplain
Angels Team
Supporter
Sep 21, 2009
28,129
3,878
Southern US
✟391,077.00
Country
United States
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
Prove that assault weapons 'are too freely available to people who shouldn't have them". Let's see your data, and along with it, the data that confirms the 1993 assault weapon ban made a significant impact. What? You have none? Just as I thought.
 
Upvote 0

mpok1519

Veteran
Jul 8, 2007
11,508
347
✟28,850.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
It is the dream of every government to disarm it's citizens. Even the police, who are sworn to uphold the Constitution, would prefer a disarmed populace and as a group would not only not object to this but would gladly collect the guns.

I'll even go farther as to say it's the dream of humanity to never have to use weaponry or violence against one another.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Jeffwhosoever

Faithful Servant & Seminary Student
Christian Forums Staff
Chaplain
Angels Team
Supporter
Sep 21, 2009
28,129
3,878
Southern US
✟391,077.00
Country
United States
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
I'll even go farther as to say it's the dream of humanity to never have to use weaponry or violence against one another.

Yes, but as long as there is evil in the world, that dream will never be possible.
 
Upvote 0