America is looking at removing the 2nd amednment.

Unbiased

Active member
Veteran
Joined
Jun 20, 2012
Messages
3,295
Kin
8💸
Kumi
3💴
Trait Points
0⚔️
The American law makers "specifically democrats" (According to the media) are looking at removing the 2nd amendment or making it so citizens cannot buy weapons. This is one of their primary excuses.
Now there is no citizen armament – and really, nothing short of military aircraft or an atomic weapon – that could match the US military. And even today’s Supreme Court would find it hard to permit the construction of backyard missile silos. Regrettably or not, we must concede that the conditions allowing for an armed revolution of the people have long since vanished.

The media is trying to make it seem as if the people cannot have an armed revolution as the military would come in and take over. They even go as far to as to say
There is no logical reason that anyone should have to fire dozens of shots without reloading – unless intending to deprive that many people of life and limb. The US government must make the distinction between a weapon of war, and one that could be legitimately used for sport or self-defense.
when it's not about sport its about being able to defend yourself from a corrupt government. That was the original intention of the 2nd Amendment yet the media portrays its enactment as for "hunting purposes" or your a "mass murder".

They state the solution is to take away assault weapons but when you look at history, they did that in russia when stalin was ruling and I doubt I need to go into how many people died. Many countries enacted this "no firearms practice" yet only criminals get a hold of guns. Take for example mexico. Guns are illegal yet the Mexican Mafia and Drug Cartel have weapons and use them against citizens.
 

DeadManWonderLand

Active member
Elite
Joined
Jul 2, 2012
Messages
7,167
Kin
0💸
Kumi
0💴
Trait Points
0⚔️
The American law makers "specifically democrats" (According to the media) are looking at removing the 2nd amendment or making it so citizens cannot buy weapons. This is one of their primary excuses.
Now there is no citizen armament – and really, nothing short of military aircraft or an atomic weapon – that could match the US military. And even today’s Supreme Court would find it hard to permit the construction of backyard missile silos. Regrettably or not, we must concede that the conditions allowing for an armed revolution of the people have long since vanished.

The media is trying to make it seem as if the people cannot have an armed revolution as the military would come in and take over. They even go as far to as to say
There is no logical reason that anyone should have to fire dozens of shots without reloading – unless intending to deprive that many people of life and limb. The US government must make the distinction between a weapon of war, and one that could be legitimately used for sport or self-defense.
when it's not about sport its about being able to defend yourself from a corrupt government. That was the original intention of the 2nd Amendment yet the media portrays its enactment as for "hunting purposes" or your a "mass murder".

They state the solution is to take away assault weapons but when you look at history, they did that in russia when stalin was ruling and I doubt I need to go into how many people died. Many countries enacted this "no firearms practice" yet only criminals get a hold of guns. Take for example mexico. Guns are illegal yet the Mexican Mafia and Drug Cartel have weapons and use them against citizens.
That is because the citizens themselves don't have guns and the country is for the majority broke.Japan has the best policy on guns.l
I am all for them taking guns.Guns can and will only inflict harm and suffering.Nothing else is useful for guns beyond that point.
A shield is what defines protection.Not guns.
 

Roby

Active member
Supreme
Joined
Jun 16, 2012
Messages
34,019
Kin
0💸
Kumi
0💴
Trait Points
0⚔️
Awards
Do they really think that people that want guns to shoot people won't get them?... Black market ._.'
What they are doing is basicly destroying the hobby for some people..
 

Joten Uchiha

Active member
Regular
Joined
Jul 19, 2012
Messages
1,971
Kin
0💸
Kumi
0💴
Trait Points
0⚔️
Probably because they think it will make them harder to find, wrong. Gun's are Illegal over here in England and people still manage to get their hands on them.
 

Germanicus

Active member
Veteran
Joined
Sep 25, 2012
Messages
3,679
Kin
0💸
Kumi
0💴
Trait Points
0⚔️
Awards
You can't stop incidents like the one in Connecticut by taking away guns. At that point they move to knifes, home made bombs, and so on. By no means should the Second Amendment be removed. They should simply place more regulations on the time and qualifications it requires to own fire arms. There should also be mandatory background checks. It's not about people having guns; it's about who gets them.
 

Unbiased

Active member
Veteran
Joined
Jun 20, 2012
Messages
3,295
Kin
8💸
Kumi
3💴
Trait Points
0⚔️
That is because the citizens themselves don't have guns and the country is for the majority broke.Japan has the best policy on guns.l
I am all for them taking guns.Guns can and will only inflict harm and suffering.Nothing else is useful for guns beyond that point.
A shield is what defines protection.Not guns.
Guns are illegal in Mexico. How's that working out for them? By the way your statement on "Guns can and will only inflict harm and suffering" is wrong. Humans are the one's who inflict suffering and harm. If there is any evil in the world, it lies in the hearts of mankind.
 

-Shiro-

Active member
Elite
Joined
Sep 3, 2012
Messages
6,391
Kin
0💸
Kumi
0💴
Trait Points
0⚔️
theres a way to get anything look at drugs their illigall and people use them all thre time take away guns from everyone the people who r resonsibul with them cant prote ct their familys if theirs a home ivasion. bad people will always find away to get means to hurt so the good people in the world should not have a means of protection taken away from them.. that being seild it wont happen second amendment will never go away.
 

Unbiased

Active member
Veteran
Joined
Jun 20, 2012
Messages
3,295
Kin
8💸
Kumi
3💴
Trait Points
0⚔️
I agree with these, but only because America's gun-culture is far too deep-rooted for such an instant ban to have any effect; at this point in time, any such ban would only cause a mass expansion of the black market. The most you could get away with are indeed stricter background checks and other regulations.
I think a simple background check is fine, but if its a regular background check then I'd have an issue. It shouldn't be a huge ordeal to own a weapon.
 

Unbiased

Active member
Veteran
Joined
Jun 20, 2012
Messages
3,295
Kin
8💸
Kumi
3💴
Trait Points
0⚔️
Of course that would depend on the individual you're handing it too. In some cases, a regular check may be justified.
I believe that would be correct. If someone has a history they may require one or if they get into trouble if their issue nullifies their right then the guns are removed.

Everyday, 33 Americans die by bullet
Every week 25 people in chicago die from gun shot. Not that I particularly care that place is worthless and full scum (especially the teachers).
 

Robot Boy

Active member
Legendary
Joined
Nov 6, 2011
Messages
10,044
Kin
0💸
Kumi
0💴
Trait Points
0⚔️
I think a simple background check is fine, but if its a regular background check then I'd have an issue. It shouldn't be a huge ordeal to own a weapon.
I agree...AND NO ONE IS GOING TO MESS WITH THE CONSTITUTION OUR FOUNDING FATHERS CREATED AND LEFT BEHIND I WON'T HAVE THAT!!!
 
Last edited:

Sasuke082594

Active member
Regular
Joined
Apr 11, 2012
Messages
618
Kin
0💸
Kumi
0💴
Trait Points
0⚔️
Why is it that the Government doesn't further regulate their drinking policies, yet they just want to take away firearms from civilians? Why don't they also take drinking away? It's just as bad.
 

Unbiased

Active member
Veteran
Joined
Jun 20, 2012
Messages
3,295
Kin
8💸
Kumi
3💴
Trait Points
0⚔️
Why is it that the Government doesn't further regulate their drinking policies, yet they just want to take away firearms from civilians? Why don't they also take drinking away? It's just as bad.
I am willing to bet money that people DUI of alcohol murder more people weekly then guns do.
 

Robot Boy

Active member
Legendary
Joined
Nov 6, 2011
Messages
10,044
Kin
0💸
Kumi
0💴
Trait Points
0⚔️
people have the freedom to protect themselves(owning weapons) when they feel like they're lives are being threatened and receive the training for it. Its a better option than dying in vain not being able to defend yourself. Its a better option then banning guns and making the situation worse. Sides criminal and crazy people will find other ways to kill people if people can't protect themselves. So its pointless to ban guns. They are stupid if they think they can control everything.

@ deadman wonderland -> the constitution doesn't specifically say shield, it can be any weapon hell washington wielded a gun to protect his country. You can use whatever your preference is heck even a shield if you want.
 
Last edited:

TheCCV

Active member
Veteran
Joined
Nov 14, 2012
Messages
2,412
Kin
0💸
Kumi
0💴
Trait Points
0⚔️
Couldn't care less/more about firearms, guns and ammo required weapons, but does this include combat/tactical knives?
 
Last edited:

-Ibrahim-

Active member
Regular
Joined
May 14, 2012
Messages
967
Kin
0💸
Kumi
0💴
Trait Points
0⚔️
The 2nd amendment is stupid, at the time when they wrote it the only guns they had were there shitty muskets. Now with fully automatic guns i think they need to be very very strict with guns and completely ban them.
 

Robot Boy

Active member
Legendary
Joined
Nov 6, 2011
Messages
10,044
Kin
0💸
Kumi
0💴
Trait Points
0⚔️
The 2nd amendment is stupid, at the time when they wrote it the only guns they had were there shitty muskets. Now with fully automatic guns i think they need to be very very strict with guns and completely ban them.
its a pitty you feel this way but, freedom of speech - 1st ammendment
 
Top