Boating and Firearms

1stSeaRay said:
Of course....a criminal would never think to break a gun law!
Click to expand...

Ya...the usual "if guns are criminalized only criminals will have guns..." yadda yadda.

I never said that citizens shouldnt carry concealed weapons, just I am glad there is some sort of regulation/controls over WHO can get them.
 
Last edited:
billandamy said:
The COnstitution is a living document, meant to be interpreted, thus its magnificence.
Click to expand...

The Constitution and Bill of Rights may need some interpretation to determine the intention of the authors, but they certainly did not mean for us to change the meaning to suit our fancy.

With regard to firearms, its pretty clear what at least one of the authors of the Bill of Rights had in mind.

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government"

-- Thomas Jefferson, 1 Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334
 
guns don't kill people, people kill people :grin:
 
1stSeaRay said:
The Constitution and Bill of Rights may need some interpretation to determine the intention of the authors, but they certainly did not mean for us to change the meaning to suit our fancy.

With regard to firearms, its pretty clear what at least one of the authors of the Bill of Rights had in mind.

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government"

-- Thomas Jefferson, 1 Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334
Click to expand...
Fortunately, times change, technology changes, and the idea that anyone could walk into a gun shop and buy whatever automatic weapon they want at any time is a bit scary.

And I bolded the important part for you...unless of course youre planning a coup anytime soon on Washington DC?
 

Attachments

  • lol.jpg
    lol.jpg
    21.4 KB · Views: 211
billandamy said:
"Guns dont kill people, I kill people"

Name the movie
Click to expand...
:lol:


The problem with gun laws, in Mass anyway, is it's left up to the Chief of Police of each town to issue a lic to carry or for sporting, if you know the Chief you will get a lic to carrier easier than if you don’t. The town I lived in was very hard to get a lic to carry and if you spoke to different cops in that town they would tell you they don’t see any difference between a concealed or sporting lic as far as they were concerned they are the same.
 
billandamy said:
Ya...the usual "if guns are criminalized only criminals will have guns..." yadda yadda.

I never said that citizens shouldnt carry concealed weapons, just I am glad there is some sort of regulation/controls over WHO can get them.
Click to expand...

Sounds reasonable enough....but I think the point you are missing is that a person with the intent to harm is not going to be dissuaded by the fact that its illegal for him to carry. So your local government puts on a puppet show with an application process, fingerprints, background check, etc so they can have big thick files on all the upstanding citizens who desire to carry legally. But the kids who were involved in a recent bar shootout just stuff their gats in their pants and do as they please. I'd be willing to bet they didn't get those guns from a gun store, after submitting to a background check and a waiting period. So tell me....who are the laws affecting?
 
Jack F said:
:lol:


The problem with gun laws, in Mass anyway, is it's left up to the Chief of Police of each town to issue a lic to carry or for sporting, if you know the Chief you will get a lic to carrier easier than if you don’t. The town I lived in was very hard to get a lic to carry and if you spoke to different cops in that town they would tell you they don’t see any difference between a concealed or sporting lic as far as they were concerned they are the same.
Click to expand...

To me, that would be unconstitutional, in a round about way. You either can or cannot carry concealed based on your personal record: criminal, mental etc...not because you know someone.
 
billandamy said:
Ya...the usual "if guns are criminalized only criminals will have guns..." yadda yadda.

I never said that citizens shouldnt carry concealed weapons, just I am glad there is some sort of regulation/controls over WHO can get them.
Click to expand...


Wow, I sleep better knowing there is a regulation/control in place.

Makes about as much sense as some of the airline security requirements.

One cannot carry a finger nail clipper, but how many ways can one kill with a ballpoint pen? H3ll probably even a drinking straw, garroted with a set of ear buds. Oh yeah ones legal the other is not.

How did the majority or so it seems become so socialistic and lazy?:huh:

What is that oft used cliche' "we have seen the enemy and it is us?"

How about a law requiring "Common Sense." you don't use it you loose. Very few frivolous lawsuits that way.

:thumbsup:
 
1stSeaRay said:
Sounds reasonable enough....but I think the point you are missing is that a person with the intent to harm is not going to be dissuaded by the fact that its illegal for him to carry. So your local government puts on a puppet show with an application process, fingerprints, background check, etc so they can have big thick files on all the upstanding citizens who desire to carry legally. But the kids who were involved in a recent bar shootout just stuff their gats in their pants and do as they please. I'd be willing to bet they didn't get those guns from a gun store, after submitting to a background check and a waiting period. So tell me....who are the laws affecting?
Click to expand...

A person who wants to harm will get a gun regardless if their intent is strong enough.

The gun laws keeps the marginal people from getting weapons and using them.

Think about it this way:

A criminal will get a gun no matter what laws are place. Most have nothing to lose and plan the gun usage ahead of time.

A law abiding citizen buys a gun for the correct reasons: protection of life and property from the criminal, and will use it for defense.

Then we have a whole group of people that are marginal. These are the people who if the laws werent in place, would carry/arm themselves because it is easy enough to do, with no background checks or mental history. The current laws dissuade them from bothering.
These are the people who the laws are for, and I would suspect make up the largest population. They could possibly use it at any time, for any reason.
 
billandamy said:
Fortunately, times change, technology changes, and the idea that anyone could walk into a gun shop and buy whatever automatic weapon they want at any time is a bit scary.

And I bolded the important part for you...unless of course youre planning a coup anytime soon on Washington DC?
Click to expand...

You make your positions very clear (in this thread and others) and I'm not interested in beating you over the head with mine.

A violent revolution is NOT something I would advocate, our current political trouble stems from the fact that most people are not paying attention....they just stumble along blindly with the assumption that their government has their best interests in mind. They vote for the guy with the good TV commercials, and get their information from the main stream media. We CAN get the crooks out of office, and restore some integrity to the political process without resorting to an armed revolution (I hope).

It appears that you are paying attention....even if our views are not the same I can appreciate that. Keep it up, and spread the word.
 
Last edited:
could be any weapon?

Shotgun or clock 44?

Thank you... i really think about buy a shotgun
 
billandamy said:
You must understand that this is a document almost 300 years old (although such a tiny amount of time for a country) and interpretations must take into account the changing of times, again, its brilliance and forethought of the writers.
Click to expand...


Almost 300? Explain your rounding.
 
billandamy said:
The COnstitution is a living document, meant to be interpreted, thus its magnificence.

You must understand that this is a document almost 300 years old (although such a tiny amount of time for a country) and interpretations must take into account the changing of times, again, its brilliance and forethought of the writers. I can guarantee you this, if the authors of the Constitution read the current US Code, they would go back and rewrite 99% of the sections that got "interpreted" to clear things up. What you call "brilliance and forethough" would be considered by them to be massive failure. They tried to be very specific, leaving as little room for "interpretation" as possible.

When our country was in its infancy, the public WAS the militia, thus why every citizen had a right to bear arms. I dont believe it specified anything about type...thats why a shotgun is still fine, but an automatic weapon is not.

Im kind of glad we have some guidelines for owning guns. It does keep most riff raff from running around with a concealed weapon that can be used when they are feeling a certain way.
Click to expand...

I 100% disagree.

Replacing a colonial English term with a modern day English equivalent with the exact same meaning, is acceptable. Substituting "every citizen" for the word "militia" would be a valid "interpretation". However, the authors of the Constitution put great thought into writing an accurate, detailed document, and put even more effort into clearly articulating what they wanted to say. Any other form of "interpretation" is not called for, nor allowed without ammending the original document.

I am disappointed to see that we have created unconstitutional laws. The 2nd ammendment reads "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". Not allowing someone to purchase an automatic weapon, a howitzer, etc., is an infringement, plain and simple.

The Constitution ensures my right to park a 50mm cannon on my front yard, if I wanted to. The Congress or State governements, on the other hand, have every right to determine what the punishment is if I use it to blow up your house. Believe me, put a few more criminals in front of the firing squad, and the criminals that are considering the same crime will think long and hard before they commit that crime. Laws are just words without a harsh punishment for breaking them. That isn't going to happen until we quit trying to "rehabilitate" felons and start punishing the hell out of them. Shoot the bastards!
 
billandamy said:
A person who wants to harm will get a gun regardless if their intent is strong enough.

The gun laws keeps the marginal people from getting weapons and using them.

Think about it this way:

A criminal will get a gun no matter what laws are place. Most have nothing to lose and plan the gun usage ahead of time.

A law abiding citizen buys a gun for the correct reasons: protection of life and property from the criminal, and will use it for defense.

Then we have a whole group of people that are marginal. These are the people who if the laws werent in place, would carry/arm themselves because it is easy enough to do, with no background checks or mental history. The current laws dissuade them from bothering.
These are the people who the laws are for, and I would suspect make up the largest population. They could possibly use it at any time, for any reason.
Click to expand...
I’m a law abiding citizen and have never purchased a gun for any of the “correct” reasons you list. In some cases I’ve purchased guns because I thought they were pretty and I didn’t have one like it. Yup, I’m guilty, I have purchased guns with no specific purpose or use in mind. Does that put me in the marginal group that you deem unfit and to be dissuaded from gun ownership? You feel the laws aren’t for “criminal guy” who may spray some lead at the local 7-11 but were designed for “marginal guy” who hasn’t even decided if he’s going to buy a gun let alone have a clear use for it. Personally I see nothing wrong with owning a gun even if the sole reason is only…because I can.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
113,119
Messages
1,426,568
Members
61,036
Latest member
Randy S
Back
Top