I like guns..

skinofevil

The Most
Site Supporter
Messages
2,018
Location
The Compound
No. Your rights to have something as dangerous as an atomic bomb do not exist. As soon as the government in the US finds out, they will come by and take it away from you.
The fact that human rights can be violated doesn't mean they aren't human rights.
 

maxis736

Adm‎inistrator
Messages
1,897
Location
Amsterdam - The Capital of Europe
No. Your rights to have something as dangerous as an atomic bomb do not exist. As soon as the government in the US finds out, they will come by and take it away from you.
The fact that human rights can be violated doesn't mean they aren't human rights.
There is a balance. Sure you have right, no that does not mean everything is allowed.
 

maxis736

Adm‎inistrator
Messages
1,897
Location
Amsterdam - The Capital of Europe
Right, all those muslims that are using guns.
Consult the survivors of the fucking Charlie Hebdo massacre, ass basket. Maybe that's the difference between Americans and Europeans: we give a fuck about our countrymen, you don't even remember yours.
You keep blabbering bullshit. What makes you think we do not care about people? We DO. We do more than americans.

At least we have social care for people who need it. We have laws to protect people from idiots. Our government intervenes when things go wrong with a neighborhood.
Gangs? We don't have that here.
Shootings? So little every single one is news. Not like in the US where most are considered "normal, he was black/poor/criminal anyway so who cares".
 

maxis736

Adm‎inistrator
Messages
1,897
Location
Amsterdam - The Capital of Europe
That whole 2nd ammendment is something from the past. Life has changed.
Presentism isn't going to win you any points. Life hasn't changed at all, when it comes to the fundamentals. Human beings, left to their own devices, tend to be selfish as individuals and dangerous in groups. That's natural, and it hasn't changed from then to now. Proof of that is on the news every night. Self protection remains every ounce as necessary now as it was then.

The 2nd Amendment to the Bill of Rights -- in fact, the entirety of the Bill of Rights -- only recognizes natural human rights and instructs government to not interfere with them. It isn't a list of permissions.
There you have it... "Proof of that is on the news every night". Correct. Because of all the guns there is so much violence that it's on the news every night.
In a civilized society people do not want to kill eachother. There people can trust eachother and depend on eachother.

The wild west period is over for a long time now, stop pretending it should be different. Civilized people do not need a gun.
Civilized people do not start a riot and start looting when ONE black guy is killed by the police by the guy's own fault.
Civilized people do not claim that "Black lives matter"; they know that all lives matter and that is so obvious it does not need to be mentioned. And they do not perform actions to counteract that, like having guns ready to kill other humans. Either on purpose or accidentally.

Your "2nd ammendment" is outdated so far it should be burned and the day that happens should be a national holiday. The day that the US started living in the present. Come on, you are keeping hold of a law that originates from 1791. This is 2020. A lot has changed in 229 years.
 

maxis736

Adm‎inistrator
Messages
1,897
Location
Amsterdam - The Capital of Europe
Same image, now with translations added:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


Note: Green is the Netherlands (firearm ownership is regulated), Blue is Switzerland (firearms allowed, but limited), red is US (firearms allowed too much).
 

maxis736

Adm‎inistrator
Messages
1,897
Location
Amsterdam - The Capital of Europe
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

If you look closely you will see that the syntax of this sentence is incorrect. A well regulated Militia, a well regulated militia, being necessary for the security of a free State, and then there follows a clause that does not fit in with the first part: the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
The two sentences do not connect seamlessly. Now, early in American history, it was well understood what was meant by the phrase. The gun law of the Second was the gun right of the state, not of the individuals. In those days it was common for the states to establish and maintain a militia (army) with this Second Amendment to prevent slave revolts, repel Native American attacks, and contain civilian rebellion.
After the American Civil War and certainly after World War I, a large federal army put an end to the militia of the states. It wasn't really necessary anymore. Times change.
America's largest gun association, the National Riffle Association, co-wrote laws to restrict gun use until 1977. Everything was focused on correct instructions, shooting training and above all safety. So until 1977. That year, a group of NRA members rebelled against the government and its gun-control laws and seized power in the gun club; the individual against the state. A change of direction is implemented and the 2nd Amendment was gradually turned into a right of "self-defense for the individual", where it never was this. The Supreme Court, which tests and scrutinizes the constitutions, was played with a huge lobby. Successfully. The right to bear arms is due to this misinterpretation now justified for individuals.
In recent decades, arms sales have soared to more than $ 30 billion a year at the cost of thousands of deaths. The 2nd Amendment has little to do with self-defense and comes under fire with every slaughter. Ammosexuals benefit.
 

Ice

Factory Bastard
Site Supporter
Messages
1,087
Location
Great White North
^^^ Buddy you can say what you want but you will never change the minds of gun owners.

To bad you aren't allowed guns in your world,you may actually enjoy shooting sports.
 

maxis736

Adm‎inistrator
Messages
1,897
Location
Amsterdam - The Capital of Europe
^^^ Buddy you can say what you want but you will never change the minds of gun owners.
And that is the problem! No matter what, you cannot be convinced. That is just plain stupid.

Intelligent people can be convinced and are willing to change their point of view. Idiots stick with their point, no matter what.



To bad you aren't allowed guns in your world,you may actually enjoy shooting sports.
I do like shooting clay pigeons for instance. But in a controlled and regulated environment. And where the guns are kept safe, out of reach of the people who can do harm with it.
 
Last edited:

maxis736

Adm‎inistrator
Messages
1,897
Location
Amsterdam - The Capital of Europe
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

If you look closely you will see that the syntax of this sentence is incorrect. A well regulated Militia, a well regulated militia, being necessary for the security of a free State, and then there follows a clause that does not fit in with the first part: the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
The two sentences do not connect seamlessly. Now, early in American history, it was well understood what was meant by the phrase. The gun law of the Second was the gun right of the state, not of the individuals. In those days it was common for the states to establish and maintain a militia (army) with this Second Amendment to prevent slave revolts, repel Native American attacks, and contain civilian rebellion.
After the American Civil War and certainly after World War I, a large federal army put an end to the militia of the states. It wasn't really necessary anymore. Times change.
America's largest gun association, the National Riffle Association, co-wrote laws to restrict gun use until 1977. Everything was focused on correct instructions, shooting training and above all safety. So until 1977. That year, a group of NRA members rebelled against the government and its gun-control laws and seized power in the gun club; the individual against the state. A change of direction is implemented and the 2nd Amendment was gradually turned into a right of "self-defense for the individual", where it never was this. The Supreme Court, which tests and scrutinizes the constitutions, was played with a huge lobby. Successfully. The right to bear arms is due to this misinterpretation now justified for individuals.
In recent decades, arms sales have soared to more than $ 30 billion a year at the cost of thousands of deaths. The 2nd Amendment has little to do with self-defense and comes under fire with every slaughter. Ammosexuals benefit.
@SKY Yes, boring that little thing called "the thruth"....
 
Last edited:

Ice

Factory Bastard
Site Supporter
Messages
1,087
Location
Great White North
^^^ Buddy you can say what you want but you will never change the minds of gun owners.
And that is the problem! No matter what, you cannot be convinced. That is just plain stupid.

Intelligent people can be convinced and are willing to change their point of view. Idiots stick with their point, no matter what.


Well you just called yourself an idiot because you have a closed mind and are nto willing to listen to the other side. lol
 

maxis736

Adm‎inistrator
Messages
1,897
Location
Amsterdam - The Capital of Europe
^^^ Buddy you can say what you want but you will never change the minds of gun owners.
And that is the problem! No matter what, you cannot be convinced. That is just plain stupid.

Intelligent people can be convinced and are willing to change their point of view. Idiots stick with their point, no matter what.
Well you just called yourself an idiot because you have a closed mind and are nto willing to listen to the other side. lol
OMG! You REALLY are too stupid to shit.

What arguments do you have? CONVICE me. By valid arguments.

Did you even read and UNDERSTAND what I told you?!
 
Last edited:

Ice

Factory Bastard
Site Supporter
Messages
1,087
Location
Great White North
^^^ Buddy you can say what you want but you will never change the minds of gun owners.
And that is the problem! No matter what, you cannot be convinced. That is just plain stupid.

Intelligent people can be convinced and are willing to change their point of view. Idiots stick with their point, no matter what.
Well you just called yourself an idiot because you have a closed mind and are nto willing to listen to the other side. lol
OMG! You REALLY are too stupid to shit.

What arguments do you have? CONVICE me. By valid arguments.

Did you even read and UNDERSTAND what I told you?!
It doesn't matter what I say to you,your mind is made up, guns are bad.
So shut your fucking pie hole I'm done with you..
 

TheHaze

If my dog doesn't like you, I probably won't eithe
Site Supporter
Messages
6,537
If someone breaks into your home what are you going to protect yourself with,the TV remote Ha - well if you break into my place good luck in your next life cause I shoot to kill and have no problem with that and if you don't like it then stay away from this crazy Army train looney - - - - - -
 

TheHaze

If my dog doesn't like you, I probably won't eithe
Site Supporter
Messages
6,537


 

TheHaze

If my dog doesn't like you, I probably won't eithe
Site Supporter
Messages
6,537
 

TheHaze

If my dog doesn't like you, I probably won't eithe
Site Supporter
Messages
6,537
 

skinofevil

The Most
Site Supporter
Messages
2,018
Location
The Compound
^^^ Buddy you can say what you want but you will never change the minds of gun owners.
And that is the problem! No matter what, you cannot be convinced. That is just plain stupid.

Intelligent people can be convinced and are willing to change their point of view. Idiots stick with their point, no matter what.
Well you just called yourself an idiot because you have a closed mind and are nto willing to listen to the other side. lol
OMG! You REALLY are too stupid to shit.

What arguments do you have? CONVICE me. By valid arguments.

Did you even read and UNDERSTAND what I told you?!
Do me a favor, just to satisfy my curiosity:

Lay out what you would accept as a valid argument for personal firearms ownership. Cards on the table. I don't think there is one you'd accept as valid, because you're not open to considering any.

Let me pose a further question to you -- do you believe you have the right to defend your own life against someone trying to kill you?