I would be hard pressed to disagree with you, if it weren't explicitly guaranteed in the Bill of Rights.usmarine wrote:
well it should have to be gained IMO.
k glad ive cleared that up.Parker wrote:
dope.Little BaBy JESUS wrote:
true... but i have never understood why america doesnt just put more security on its border (apart from wanting all the cheap labour from mexico)SenorToenails wrote:
Or Mexico. Obviously it's not hard to sneak across.
well you could 'maybe' get The Netherlands military,Parker wrote:
oh, im sure its really locked down, and im sure they keep the planes in those bunkers....but there can only be so many people at one base.^*AlphA*^ wrote:
they should store their planes better in that case, we store them here in 'nuclear proof' bunkers, well at least they can take TNT for sure...Parker wrote:
i have access to a rifle that is accurate out to 2500 yards.
i also have access to a bunch of people with guns and pickup trucks.......im sure SOME diversion could be created long enough to put down some planes.
and thats not even including the TNT, black powder, fertilizer etc. that could be used to help.
then you would need to shoot them down while taking off/landing...
But i dunno how well protected US bases in the USA are.
we have the ability, so there is no reason why we couldnt breach the defenses.
pipe bombs on any perimeter will make people move or die.
i mean, dont get me wrong, we would get our asses killed on a daily basis, but i dont think its impossible to accomplish.
shoot down, 130 or so F-16's, 82 Leopard 2A6 tanks, 1,000's of other vehicles, I mean we have the population of the Metropolitain area of LA or not?
I stand by my thing that when it comes to equipment..... I mean wouldn't it be like it is in Iraq now? like sure you can get something here and there but afterwards 5 times more losses on your side + the motivation on the army side should be considered higher...and loyalty.. training...
maybe some damages here and there but I don't see them defeating the army/government.
...because our elected officials want to be re-elected, and there are a lot of voters who want their cheap illegal labor force.Little BaBy JESUS wrote:
true... but i have never understood why america doesnt just put more security on its border (apart from wanting all the cheap labour from mexico)SenorToenails wrote:
Or Mexico. Obviously it's not hard to sneak across.Little BaBy JESUS wrote:
unless america is one giant gun free zone... then u have to get guns from over seas... and thats alittle harder.
maybe not defeating them, but inflict enough damage to make them want to change their thinking.^*AlphA*^ wrote:
well you could 'maybe' get The Netherlands military,Parker wrote:
oh, im sure its really locked down, and im sure they keep the planes in those bunkers....but there can only be so many people at one base.^*AlphA*^ wrote:
they should store their planes better in that case, we store them here in 'nuclear proof' bunkers, well at least they can take TNT for sure...
then you would need to shoot them down while taking off/landing...
But i dunno how well protected US bases in the USA are.
we have the ability, so there is no reason why we couldnt breach the defenses.
pipe bombs on any perimeter will make people move or die.
i mean, dont get me wrong, we would get our asses killed on a daily basis, but i dont think its impossible to accomplish.
shoot down, 130 or so F-16's, 82 Leopard 2A6 tanks, 1,000's of other vehicles, I mean we have the population of the Metropolitain area of LA or not?
I stand by my thing that when it comes to equipment..... I mean wouldn't it be like it is in Iraq now? like sure you can get something here and there but afterwards 5 times more losses on your side + the motivation on the army side should be considered higher...and loyalty.. training...
maybe some damages here and there but I don't see them defeating the army/government.
i still think we could do it....like i said, MASSIVE losses, but it could be done.
Yes, but I never saw an age limit in the bill of rights. Why can't a 12yr old own a gun?SenorToenails wrote:
I would be hard pressed to disagree with you, if it weren't explicitly guaranteed in the Bill of Rights.usmarine wrote:
well it should have to be gained IMO.
not enough time to prove that they are "responsible".usmarine wrote:
Yes, but I never saw an age limit in the bill of rights. Why can't a 12yr old own a gun?SenorToenails wrote:
I would be hard pressed to disagree with you, if it weren't explicitly guaranteed in the Bill of Rights.usmarine wrote:
well it should have to be gained IMO.
but that is not spelled out in the bill of rights eitherParker wrote:
not enough time to prove that they are "responsible".
"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."usmarine wrote:
Yes, but I never saw an age limit in the bill of rights. Why can't a 12yr old own a gun?
Allowing certain restrictions on this is not unconstitutional. Waiting until you are 18 to buy a gun is not infringing your rights. Neither is needing a pistol permit, or having a waiting period. The point is that the right to bear arms is guaranteed until you lose it. (And that isn't unconstitutional either)
If you make it so you need to have a license to own any firearm, it would probably be in violation of the second amendment.
...ok, this discussion has gone way past 'reasonable,' and crossed into 'overboard.' I am outa here.
That's why the courts interpret these things.usmarine wrote:
but that is not spelled out in the bill of rights either
nuke earthimortal wrote:
...ok, this discussion has gone way past 'reasonable,' and crossed into 'overboard.' I am outa here.
amend the amendmentSenorToenails wrote:
"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."usmarine wrote:
Yes, but I never saw an age limit in the bill of rights. Why can't a 12yr old own a gun?
Allowing certain restrictions on this is not unconstitutional. Waiting until you are 18 to buy a gun is not infringing your rights. Neither is needing a pistol permit, or having a waiting period. The point is that the right to bear arms is guaranteed until you lose it. (And that isn't unconstitutional either)
If you make it so you need to have a license to own any firearm, it would probably be in violation of the second amendment.
interpret .... usually in there favorSenorToenails wrote:
That's why the courts interpret these things.usmarine wrote:
but that is not spelled out in the bill of rights either
usually whatever the national sentiment is at the time.SEREMAKER wrote:
interpret .... usually in there favorSenorToenails wrote:
That's why the courts interpret these things.usmarine wrote:
but that is not spelled out in the bill of rights either
don't forget also that each state has there own consitiution ........SenorToenails wrote:
"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."usmarine wrote:
Yes, but I never saw an age limit in the bill of rights. Why can't a 12yr old own a gun?
Allowing certain restrictions on this is not unconstitutional. Waiting until you are 18 to buy a gun is not infringing your rights. Neither is needing a pistol permit, or having a waiting period. The point is that the right to bear arms is guaranteed until you lose it. (And that isn't unconstitutional either)
If you make it so you need to have a license to own any firearm, it would probably be in violation of the second amendment.
or who can fill there pockets the quickestGunSlinger OIF II wrote:
usually whatever the national sentiment is at the time.SEREMAKER wrote:
interpret .... usually in there favorSenorToenails wrote:
That's why the courts interpret these things.
please if you wanna quote again, edit your post and delete the second "double" post.
I do not think it is unreasonable to require a license. If timmy would have walked into the local log cabin school house and blown everyone away, I am sure the founding slave owners erm.......fathers would have done something about it.
Last edited by usmarine (2008-03-08 14:55:40)
like getting a license to operate your own private piece of equipment to drive on streets that you help pay for in taxes in order to ensure that you are documented as a trained driver.
Wait who has an issue with getting a license? If you're gonna be a responsible gun owner what's the problem?
Federal laws trump state laws, do they not? Gun control, to a point, is constitutional given the current interpretation of the the second amendment. That may change. Who knows.SEREMAKER wrote:
don't forget also that each state has there own consitiution ........
OK...SEREMAKER wrote:
or who can fill there pockets the quickestGunSlinger OIF II wrote:
usually whatever the national sentiment is at the time.SEREMAKER wrote:
interpret .... usually in there favor
#1 Guns don't kill people.
#2 It is the bullets that kill people.
#3 Safer bullets won't kill people, we need to legistlate safer bullets.
#4 Bullets that are pointy and hard are VERY VERY dangerous, blunt bullets made out of soft materials like nerf or silly puddy are indeed what I am advocating. If Washington D.C. would have done this in 2004 then many of the Red dots on the map would be a different color and that is what we ultimately want because Red dots are bad, very very bad.
Yerded Lives! Who is Moderating the Moderators?
#2 It is the bullets that kill people.
#3 Safer bullets won't kill people, we need to legistlate safer bullets.
#4 Bullets that are pointy and hard are VERY VERY dangerous, blunt bullets made out of soft materials like nerf or silly puddy are indeed what I am advocating. If Washington D.C. would have done this in 2004 then many of the Red dots on the map would be a different color and that is what we ultimately want because Red dots are bad, very very bad.
Yerded Lives! Who is Moderating the Moderators?
out of the ashes
major spittle lulz
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rubber_bulletsLotta_Drool wrote:
\blunt bullets made out of soft materials like nerf or silly puddy are indeed what I am advocating.
lol, thats great.