At Least 1 Dead in Shooting at Texas Church

Use me as an example. I don't own any guns nor do I have a criminal record. Let's say I decide I want to go shoot someone. What legislation would you propose that would not allow me to purchase a gun that doesn't exist today that would prevent me from carrying out such a criminal act?

You're missing the point.
 
To 'regulate' something means to make 'regular', or consistent. It does not mean 'restriction' or 'limitation'.

The Constitution does not give any right. Rights are inherent. The Constitution declares and organizes government and describes the powers and authorities it has. In the case of the U.S. Constitution, it also lists certain binding agreements the States have made with each other and also gives the federal government authority to enforce these agreements.

One of these agreements is the right to bear arms by the people. The 2nd amendment does not specify what type of arm, therefore ANY arm will do. Swords, knives, guns (including machine guns), brass knuckles, etc., are legal. No layer of government in the United States can constitutionally pass any law to ban or limit them.

The right to self defense is inherent. It does not come from the 2nd amendment.

Here we go with the semantics again, call it what you like, regulate, limit, administer, monitor, control, oversee, handle, etc., whatever works for you

So now you are telling us the supposed right to have a gun is an "inherent," certainly what you are implying with the deflection

And the part of your "agreement" that you are overlooking is the prefatory clause, that which cites the purpose of the following operative clause
 
You will NEVER stop the Stephen Paddocks of the world, people like him will find a way to kill..he had the $$ to buy guns on the streets

Just like u will NEVER stop the guy that gets a box truck to kill

Now if the next Stephen Paddock goes to shooting at a mall etc, and a good guy with a gun is close by may stop him...Just like the guy in the church was stopped

Ah, Stephen Paddock was a good guy with a gun up until he pulled the trigger, which is often the case with mass shooters
 
As I said, little, you are going to the extreme, and how many people are going to resort to a "black market," you going travel into the Tenderloin to pick up a piece?

dude.....I'm pretty sure that ANYONE prepared to murder someone isn't going to hesitate at going to a "black market" to buy a gun........
 
stop limiting or denying peoples RIGHT to defend themselves, you'll see less of these shootings. where this RIGHT is not limited or denied, the number of casualties is on the people refusing to exercise that right.

No one is denying you the right to defend yourself, how one defends themselves doesn't mean everyone should have a gun
 
No one is denying you the right to defend yourself, how one defends themselves doesn't mean everyone should have a gun

try buying/owning a gun in california, or new jersey, or new york, and soon virginia. And you don't defend yourself against someone with a gun by wielding a knife or golf club.
 
You're talking about people who want to shoot people not having guns. I'm not a gun person so I have no idea how easy or difficult it is to get a gun not purchased legally in a store. I'm guessing like drugs and other items it's probably not all that difficult. So even if you pass legislation that would take me months to legally buy a guy I still have options to get a gun elsewhere if I so desire.

"cawacko" you are going in circles here, and today you don't have to go ends to obtain a gun legally, access to the Internet will do it, point being by raising hurdles to access is going to discourage a large number of individuals as yourself from going after a gun and killing innocent people besides the individual you want to kill
 
Box truck in France killed the most!

Box truck France 86 people killed
Many Guns Las Vegas 60 people killed

As I asked earlier, cite us hundreds of examples where box trucks were employed to kill people, and by the way, Paddock killed sixty but shot over four hundred, you got a box truck attack that compares?
 
Here we go with the semantics again, call it what you like, regulate, limit, administer, monitor, control, oversee, handle, etc., whatever works for you

So now you are telling us the supposed right to have a gun is an "inherent," certainly what you are implying with the deflection

And the part of your "agreement" that you are overlooking is the prefatory clause, that which cites the purpose of the following operative clause

the 'right' is to keep and bear ARMS.......whether its a sword or a gun is irrelevant. and your 'prefatory' clause gives the reason WHY we have the right, not a requirement to have the right. Also, NOWHERE in the founders debates will you find any mention that ONLY government regulated and controlled bodies of people are allowed guns.
 
As I asked earlier, cite us hundreds of examples where box trucks were employed to kill people, and by the way, Paddock killed sixty but shot over four hundred, you got a box truck attack that compares?

France truck also injured 458 killed 86
 
try buying/owning a gun in california, or new jersey, or new york, and soon virginia. And you don't defend yourself against someone with a gun by wielding a knife or golf club.

Lets get real, how many times have you been attacked by someone with a gun? You have a better chance getting hit by lightning, does that mean we should all stay indoors preparing for the worse?

New York, with one of the biggest urban population in the US, has one of the lowest murder rates by guns in the country, think there might be a relationship
 
Back
Top