Conquer Club

apey wrote:someone should shoot suggs

and then after they get rid of the second we can work on the first

out of curiosity, as far as the bill of rights amendments go...how highly up do you rank the 2nd amendment as far as essential rights to citizens or as a measure of necessity in order for the US to exist in the goal of forming a more perfect union?

I would rate it as number two or three

freedom of speech is and always will be number one

apey wrote:I would rate it as number two or three

freedom of speech is and always will be number one

fair enough.

Ntetos wrote:

apey wrote:yes but if it stood and they kept the ban other states would have followed so it is a great day for us gun owners

It's a greater day for gun manufacturers and gun sellers.

and homicide. A great day for homicide.

HC guns and knives don't kill ppl, ppl kill ppl, if you really want someone dead you will find a way.

let us not forget that cain killed abel long before there were guns

Its damned odd how yanks, who can be quite sensible on some matters, such as free speech, can be neanderthals on the issues of guns.
Curious.
I just hope none of them think free speech and the right to bear arms is linked. That would be amusing.

apey wrote:HC guns and knives don't kill ppl, ppl kill ppl, if you really want someone dead you will find a way.

let us not forget that cain killed abel long before there were guns

when you have an argument, let us know. I'm not in the mood for sunday school gibberish.

got tonkaed wrote:

apey wrote:someone should shoot suggs

and then after they get rid of the second we can work on the first

out of curiosity, as far as the bill of rights amendments go...how highly up do you rank the 2nd amendment as far as essential rights to citizens or as a measure of necessity in order for the US to exist in the goal of forming a more perfect union?

I'd rate it quite low

suggs wrote:Its damned odd how yanks, who can be quite sensible on some matters, such as free speech, can be neanderthals on the issues of guns.
Curious.
I just hope none of them think free speech and the right to bear arms is linked. That would be amusing.

ive seen it argued before.

though its rather irrelevant i suppose id rank the 8 amendments (assuming we throw out 9/10 - as they are catchalls rather than specific provisions as important today as follows)

1) I
2) IV
3) V
4) VI
5) VIII
6) VII
7) II
8 ) III

got tonkaed wrote:

apey wrote:I would rate it as number two or three

freedom of speech is and always will be number one

fair enough.

Really, I'd put five, six, and seven up there, even back in the day when I supported the amendment. But to each his own. I agree with suggs that it's a bit of an embarrassment.

Yep, the gun nonsense in the states is good evidence of the problem of having a static, written constitution.
And its just gonna get sillier as time passes.

I disagree GT, I think protection from quartering is supremely more important than the right to bear arms. After all, having to be hospitable to a soldier during war time is the ultimate abuse of inherent human rights.

suggs wrote:Yep, the gun nonsense in the states is good evidence of the problem of having a static, written constitution.
And its just gonna get sillier as time passes.

Well, I don't know about all that. There is a significant possibility that it might not. Odds might not be that great, but it's possible.

InkL0sed wrote:I disagree GT, I think protection from quartering is supremely more important than the right to bear arms. After all, having to be hospitable to a soldier during war time is the ultimate abuse of inherent human rights.

Well, I'd say most of them are more important than the second. Except for the ninth. What's that about? And I don't remember him giving his opinion on the matter... that doesn't seem like something he'd do.

InkL0sed wrote:I disagree GT, I think protection from quartering is supremely more important than the right to bear arms. After all, having to be hospitable to a soldier during war time is the ultimate abuse of inherent human rights.

3 is at the bottom of the list because it has far outlived the timeperiod in which it was a real concern. the sheer scale difference between the two of them at this point makes the 3rd amendment less important.

got tonkaed wrote:

InkL0sed wrote:I disagree GT, I think protection from quartering is supremely more important than the right to bear arms. After all, having to be hospitable to a soldier during war time is the ultimate abuse of inherent human rights.

3 is at the bottom of the list because it has far outlived the timeperiod in which it was a real concern. the sheer scale difference between the two of them at this point makes the 3rd amendment less important.

psst, tonka... that post wasn't quite serious...

InkL0sed wrote:

got tonkaed wrote:

InkL0sed wrote:I disagree GT, I think protection from quartering is supremely more important than the right to bear arms. After all, having to be hospitable to a soldier during war time is the ultimate abuse of inherent human rights.

3 is at the bottom of the list because it has far outlived the timeperiod in which it was a real concern. the sheer scale difference between the two of them at this point makes the 3rd amendment less important.

psst, tonka... that post wasn't quite serious...

well i are serious cat and this is serious thread lol

I am sorry if I think that I should have a gun at my home and that I should know how to use one. I don't own my guns to go out and rob banks and kill people. I have my guns so that if someone thinks that they can break into my home while my husband is at work and rape me or beat me or hurt my children. I have my guns for my protection and for hunting (for the record we own one nine mil and a rifle and a .22) do I think that everyone should have one well no I think that you should have to pass back ground checks have permits and be of certain age

BUT I WILL BE DAMNED if someone is going to hurt me or my children in my home and I am proud to be a gun owner!!

i dont really have a problem with that, i just think it is a less important right as far as organizing a nation state is. It seems hard to tell people how they should feel best to protect their family and their assests.

apey wrote:HC guns and knives don't kill ppl, rappers kill ppl, if you really want someone dead you will find a way.

let us not forget that cain killed abel long before there were guns

fixd.

<oops>

... A fascist regime thrives with a "gun grab" to kick things off. Guns are very useful for protecting one's family and home, but they also serve as a means to rid ourselves of a government gone mad.

... I know, that's not terribly realistic and most probably would be a bloodbath ending with the US Army victorious over enraged citizens, but gun ownership remains a deterrent nonetheless.

... Imagine if every Jew in Europe during Hitler's time had owned a loaded .45 and met Nazi oppression with bullets flying. How many dead Nazis would it take before the Third Reich developed second thoughts about its final solution. Sure, Hitler wouldn't much care, but those SS officers knocking on doors to grab Jews would have called in sick a few days more than the norm I think.

... Citizens are armed. Subjects are not.

...

I am proud to be able to live in a country where I have a right to own a firearm (or at the very least, I live in a country where my good neighbor can own a firearm!) Today was a great day for pro-constitutionalists everywhere! I am sorry that Suggsy lives in a country where they are oppressed throughout their dull, dreary, umbrella covered lives, and as much as Suggs is sure spoken about American government and politics, you would think that he would see the value in the Second Amendment.

But I do not expect someone that has grown up without that right to understand how important it is to retain.

Suggs is a beautiful man, but he is quite wrong on the guns being bad issue...

I liken Suggsy to the monkey that lived in a box for its whole life. And then one day, someone opened the box. The monkey's eyes got real big, as he had never seen the Sun before, and his nostrils flared with the scent of flowers. He had never smelled a rose before! Then he peeked out and saw a big world! But he did not understand, because he was used to living in his box. And even though his box was open and he was free to go where and when he wanted, the monkey decided to remain in the box, because that is where he grew up and that is where he felt the most comfortable, even though the world was wide open to him and he was now free to do what he wished. So the monkey just sat inside his box, played with his monkey testicles, and ate his own monkey turds.

The End.

DaGip wrote:... Citizens are armed. Subjects are not.

Pretty.....


I think that this is an America thing. Doesn't seem that anyone else really gets it. I don't own a gun myself, but stand firmly by your right to own one.

Aren't there any Canadians who want to get in on this? I though Canada had more guns per capita than the U.S.?
(that's why I called it an America thing)

DaGip wrote:I liken Suggsy to the monkey that lived in a box for its whole life. And then one day, someone opened the box. The monkey's eyes got real big, as he had never seen the Sun before, and his nostrils flared with the scent of flowers. He had never smelled a rose before! Then he peeked out and saw a big world! But he did not understand, because he was used to living in his box. And even though his box was open and he was free to go where and when he wanted, the monkey decided to remain in the box, because that is where he grew up and that is where he felt the most comfortable, even though the world was wide open to him and he was now free to do what he wished. So the monkey just sat inside his box, played with his monkey testicles, and ate his own monkey turds.

WTF? Where did this come from?

From my beautiful mind...