1. Welcome! Please take a few seconds to create your free account to post threads, make some friends, remove a few ads while surfing and much more. ClutchFans has been bringing fans together to talk Houston Sports since 1996. Join us!

DOD Ends Sale of Expended Military Brass to Remanufacturers

Discussion in 'BBS Hangout: Debate & Discussion' started by OddsOn, Mar 17, 2009.

  1. rhadamanthus

    rhadamanthus Member

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2002
    Messages:
    14,304
    Likes Received:
    596
    Not Necessarily. That's the point.

    I note you ignored the SAM example....
     
  2. Artesticle

    Artesticle Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2009
    Messages:
    251
    Likes Received:
    2
    They should ban cars first. More than twice as many people are killed by cars than by guns. I could easily take my truck and go run over a butt-load of statist gun banners if I wished.
     
  3. Artesticle

    Artesticle Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2009
    Messages:
    251
    Likes Received:
    2
    O yeah, liberals pretty much want to ban cars too. I forgot.
     
  4. Major

    Major Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 1999
    Messages:
    41,683
    Likes Received:
    16,209
    Of course, cars have a primary purpose besides death or injury.
     
  5. ROXRAN

    ROXRAN Member

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2000
    Messages:
    18,821
    Likes Received:
    5,226
    What is alcohol's primary purpose?...If the goal is to strictly save lives from "things we don't need", the culprits in hierachy would be alcohol big time,....then the cliff drops to #2...Guns might be 4th or even 5th on the demented list after tobacco, teenage driver's licenses/fast cars, fast food, and gambling....

    I would love to take one of my liberal friends shooting with me...I did this one time with my M4 semi auto., and I think I made a closet gun lover that day...All smiles (and a liberal to boot!)
     
  6. CometsWin

    CometsWin Breaker Breaker One Nine

    Joined:
    May 15, 2000
    Messages:
    28,028
    Likes Received:
    13,051



    Are you on crack? You must be the first to person to try to misquote your own quote.

    Let's try it again.

    "The right [to bear arms] is general. It may be supposed from the phraseology of this provision that the right to keep and bear arms was only guaranteed to the militia; but this would be an interpretation not warranted by the intent. The militia, as has been explained elsewhere, consists of those persons who, under the laws, are liable to the performance of military duty, and are officered and enrolled for service when called upon.... f the right were limited to those enrolled, the purpose of the guarantee might be defeated altogether by the action or the neglect to act of the government it was meant to hold in check. The meaning of the provision undoubtedly is, that the people, from whom the militia must be taken, shall have the right to keep and bear arms, and they need no permission or regulation of law for the purpose. But this enables the government to have a well regulated militia; for to bear arms implies something more than mere keeping; it implies the learning to handle and use them in a way that makes those who keep them ready for their efficient use; in other words, it implies the right to meet for voluntary discipline in arms, observing in so doing the laws of public order."
    -- Thomas M. Cooley, General Principles of Constitutional Law, Third Edition [1898]


    1) Cooley says the militia consists of those persons who would be called upon for military duty.
    2) He then says if the right to bear arms were only limited to those enrolled in the militia, that the purpose of the right might be defeated or neglected by the government it was meant to check. Therefore, the right to bear arms should extend to those people from whom the militia must be taken. In other words, those who are elibigible for military service per his definition of the word militia.


    That all means that Cooley believes that the right to keep and bear arms is only guaranteed to people who are eligible for military service... people who would be chosen for militia duty.

    If you agree with him, then this limits the 2nd amendment's power quite significantly. DOH.


    You said this...

    It appears you believe the 2nd amendment is a pillar that made this country great and prosperous so please explain in detail.
     
  7. Artesticle

    Artesticle Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2009
    Messages:
    251
    Likes Received:
    2
    Libertarians, like other Americans, want to be able to walk city streets safely and be secure in their homes. We also want our Constitutional rights protected, to guard against the erosion of our civil liberties. In particular, Libertarians want to see all people treated equally under the law, as our Constitution requires. America's millions of gun owners are people too.

    Law-abiding, responsible citizens do not and should not need to ask anyone's permission or approval to engage in a peaceful activity. Gun ownership, by itself, harms no other person and cannot morally justify criminal penalties.

    Constitutional Rights

    America's founders fought the Revolutionary War to throw off British tyranny. Most of the revolutionaries owned and used their own guns in that war. After the war, in 1789, the 13 American States adopted the Constitution, creating the federal government. Before ratifying the Constitution, the people demanded a Bill of Rights to prevent our government from depriving them of their liberties as the British had done.

    One of the most important protections we have against government tyranny is that we are presumed innocent of any crime until proven guilty, before a jury, in a proper trial.

    Gun control advocates would declare all gun owners guilty without trial, simply for owning guns, even though millions of them have never used their guns to harm another person. Such blanket condemnation is immoral, unfair and contrary to the principles on which America was founded.

    The Prohibition Lesson

    Gun control advocates are much like the prohibitionists of the early 20th Century. By making liquor illegal, they spawned organized crime, caused bloody, violent turf wars and corrupted the criminal justice system. Today's war on drugs has exactly the same results.

    Prohibition didn't stop liquor use; the drug laws can't stop drug use. Making gun ownership illegal will not stop gun ownership.

    The primary victim of these misguided efforts is the honest citizen whose civil rights are trampled as frustrated legislators and police tighten the screws.

    Banning guns will make guns more expensive and give organized crime a great opportunity to make profits in a new black market for weapons. Street violence will increase in new turf wars. Criminals will not give up their guns. But, many law abiding citizens will, leaving them defenseless against armed bandits.
    The Right of Self Defense

    Libertarians agree with the majority of Americans who believe they have the right to decide how best to protect themselves, their families and their property. Millions of Americans have guns in their homes and sleep more comfortably because of it. Studies show that where gun ownership is illegal, residential burglaries are higher. A man with a gun in his home is no threat to you if you aren't breaking into it.

    The police do not provide security in your home, your business or the street. They show up after the crime to take reports and do detective work. The poorer the neighborhood, the riskier it is for peaceful residents.

    Only an armed citizenry can be present in sufficient numbers to prevent or deter violent crime before it starts, or to reduce its spread. Interviews with convicted felons indicate that fear of the armed citizen significantly deters crime. A criminal is more likely to be driven off from a particular crime by an armed victim than to be convicted and imprisoned for it. Thus, widespread gun ownership will make neighborhoods safer.

    Foolish politicians and police now seek to ban semi-automatic "assault rifles". They ignore the fact that only honest citizens will comply; criminals will still have them. Such a ban will only increase the criminals' ability to victimize the innocent.
    Personal Responsibility

    Guns are not the problem. They are inanimate objects. Gun control advocates talk as if guns could act on their own, as if human beings cannot control them, so the uncontrollable guns must be banished.

    Let us put the responsibility where it belongs, on the owner and user of the gun. If he or she acts responsibly, without attacking others or causing injury negligently, no crime or harm has been done. Leave them in peace. But, if a person commits a crime with a gun, then impose the severest penalties for the injuries done to the victim. Similarly, hold the negligent gun user fully liable for all harm his negligence does to others.

    Rather than banning guns, the politicians and the police should encourage gun ownership, as well as education and training programs. A responsible, well-armed and trained citizenry is the best protection against domestic crime and the threat of foreign invasion. America's founders knew that. It is still true today.

    http://www.lp.org/issues/gun-laws



    [​IMG][​IMG]

    <object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/dYdkt7yIFLY&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/dYdkt7yIFLY&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>
     
  8. Bandwagoner

    Bandwagoner Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2006
    Messages:
    27,105
    Likes Received:
    3,757

Share This Page