• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

2nd Amendment rights?

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
You know Matthiasa , even if you get it your way, I'll just declare myself a militia of one.

Theres really no way around it.
 
in my view, people should have the right to carry, but if they are stupid enough to go postal (except in personal self defense or when innocent life is threatened), they should get the book thrown at them and be prohibited from carrying a firearm.

I don't object to people carrying a gun, I object to idiots who don't treat firearms as a dangerous tool, especially if you point it at the wrong person.

from what I've heard, the first rule is to always assume a firearm is loaded (and treat it like such)
 
ModerateRepZero said:
in my view, people should have the right to carry, but if they are stupid enough to go postal (except in personal self defense or when innocent life is threatened), they should get the book thrown at them and be prohibited from carrying a firearm.

I don't object to people carrying a gun, I object to idiots who don't treat firearms as a dangerous tool, especially if you point it at the wrong person.

from what I've heard, the first rule is to always assume a firearm is loaded (and treat it like such)
Click to expand...

Convicted felons can't own guns. Can't even have them in their residence. It's a mandatory 5 or 10 year federal sentence if they do. It's even more stiff penalty if you have multiple felony convictions of any kind.
 
techs said:
The problem is that the writers of the Constitution knew this as a gun:
22-1037.gif


And had no idea this would turn out to be a gun:
ak47.jpg
Click to expand...

The problem is, people arent trying to open carry an AK, but a pistol. And yet some people misconstrue this, to further there agenda. AKA you.
 
Slew Foot said:
Some people love America. Other are communists who want to take away others rights.
Click to expand...

That's kind of how you get them. You start by taking away other people's rights. Like the Native Americans (lives), the Africans (slaves), and then pretend you derive inherent "right" to be in America.
 
techs said:
The problem is that the writers of the Constitution knew this as a gun:
22-1037.gif


And had no idea this would turn out to be a gun:
ak47.jpg
Click to expand...
Interesting, you post two guns which serve the same purpose in different times. Both weapons are what period soldiers carried.

Try again with a more "scary" assault weapon, something with scopes/suppressors/etc.
 
x_86 said:
Interesting, you post two guns which serve the same purpose in different times. Both weapons are what period soldiers carried.

Try again with a more "scary" assault weapon, something with scopes/suppressors/etc.
Click to expand...

Good point. Also the AK-47 is known as the Liberator for it's role in people overcoming dictatorships or freeing themselves from oppression.
 
marvdmartian said:
Would those be the same people who knew that in recent historical times (to them), armies fought with long bows, pikes and swords? And that those same armies fought with black powder muskets during their time?

Wow.....those guys must have been pretty short-sighted, to not be able to figure out that technological advances might some day take armies past the use of muskets!! 🙄
Click to expand...

Wow. You really miss the point. The writers of the Constitution counted a slave as 3/5ths of a white man. They left it for future generations to change it.
I don't think you could find 10 percent of Americans who think rifle ownership is illegal. It's when you get into rate of fire you substantially change what the rifle is.
And, interestingly, almost no one went around carrying a hand gun when the Constitution was written, just an fyi.
 
Train said:
The stupid way apparently.
Click to expand...

And another person unable to read. 🙁

nick1985 said:
Matthiasa, do you think that gun control legislation is effective?
Click to expand...

Effective at keeping guns in the hands of criminals why yes, yes they are. 😛

As I have said 2903840932089243 times already in this tread I prefer that people assuming they are not stupid and or are not criminals that they be allowed to own guns, even "assault weapons".
 
Last edited:
techs said:
Wow. You really miss the point. The writers of the Constitution counted a slave as 3/5ths of a white man. They left it for future generations to change it.
I don't think you could find 10 percent of Americans who think rifle ownership is illegal. It's when you get into rate of fire you substantially change what the rifle is.
And, interestingly, almost no one went around carrying a hand gun when the Constitution was written, just an fyi.
Click to expand...

Do you know anything about guns besides "ZOMG SCARY!"?
 
techs said:
Wow. You really miss the point. The writers of the Constitution counted a slave as 3/5ths of a white man. They left it for future generations to change it.
I don't think you could find 10 percent of Americans who think rifle ownership is illegal. It's when you get into rate of fire you substantially change what the rifle is.
Click to expand...

Rate of fire has nothing to do with intentions of the founding fathers when they wrote the 2A.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top