If u ban any guns at all you would be violating the second amendment. It does matter where u get hit at a 22 will do just as much damage as an uzi if u get hit.
I said if fired at you it would have a better chance of killing you than a 22 would. Then you threw that part in there about firing at the head to make it seem like thats what I meand and it wasnt. No it doesnt, because I dont own any assault weapons like an uzi or AK. I never said ban all guns, just those types.
If u ban any guns at all you would be violating the second amendment. It does matter where u get hit at a 22 will do just as much damage as an uzi if u get hit.
"Somebody may beat me, but they are going to have to bleed to do it." -Pre
Not the way I look at it. And how so?
If you ban any guns that is going against the right to bare arms. How is that difficult to understand?
"Somebody may beat me, but they are going to have to bleed to do it." -Pre
Because I see the 2nd amendment as somewhat outdated. At the time there werent any guns like the ones we have today and IMO I dont think the founding fathers anticipated the advances in weaponry- I've said this a million times.
What would u put in to change it? That no citizen can legally own a gun?
"Somebody may beat me, but they are going to have to bleed to do it." -Pre
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: R13</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Because I see the 2nd amendment as somewhat outdated. At the time there werent any guns like the ones we have today and IMO I dont think the founding fathers anticipated the advances in weaponry- I've said this a million times. </div></div>
So just how much of the Constitution do you think is outdated? Let's just let you re-write it all.
"We cannot expect the Americans to jump from capitalism to Communism, but we can assist their elected leaders in giving Americans small doses of socialism until they suddenly awake to find they have Communism."
- Soviet Leader Nikita Khrushchev, 1959
Welcome to the USSA!
I just think that public - assault weapons - doesnt need access to types like that.
Even if they are not legal people will still get them. That has already been said and proven so banning them would have little to no impact at all.
"Somebody may beat me, but they are going to have to bleed to do it." -Pre
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: GC1</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: R13</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Because I see the 2nd amendment as somewhat outdated. At the time there werent any guns like the ones we have today and IMO I dont think the founding fathers anticipated the advances in weaponry- I've said this a million times. </div></div>
So just how much of the Constitution do you think is outdated? Let's just let you re-write it all. </div></div>
We are talking the 2nd.
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks