pa2a.org


Share Thread:  
Brainwashed public reacts to possible AWB
#11
andrewjs18;69818 Wrote:it's extremely easy to want to 'do something' based on emotion rather than actually sitting down and rationally thinking about a problem and coming up with a solution to the problem, if one actually exists.

I think government should get rid of these dumb fucking gun free zones and the mundane laws about not being able to carry in and/or on school grounds for starters. second, I think teachers and faculty within the school system should be allowed to carry on school property if they voluntarily decide they want to.

on the flip side, I'm not too keen on putting cops in schools because then it becomes more and more like a prison system. being that I've actually worked at a school district where some of the schools actually did look like prisons (cops, bars on the windows and metal detectors on every single floor) with lockers and a lot of different rooms (various schools within Philadelphia), I think that it sets the wrong mental note to the kids within that school.

How about well-trained, armed, private security who do not wear uniforms similar to what police wear?
Reply
#12
Outlaw guns for private security too. ONLY police and military, and police should not be positioned at public property...ever...as guards.

Banks are public. So are grocery stores. So are liberal news stations. So are Hollywood functions.

When the left cannot purchase the security they want to have the average citizen denied, THEN they will see the light.

They say only police and military? Private security firms are not police OR military.
Vampire pig man since September 2012
Reply
#13
Camper;69840 Wrote:Outlaw guns for private security too. ONLY police and military, and police should not be positioned at public property...ever...as guards.

Banks are public. So are grocery stores. So are liberal news stations. So are Hollywood functions.

When the left cannot purchase the security they want to have the average citizen denied, THEN they will see the light.

They say only police and military? Private security firms are not police OR military.

I completely agree that what is good for the goose is good for the gander, which is the one positive about the new NY gun laws. There were no exemptions for law enforcement, and until things change, officers have downgraded their magazines and are livid about it. Some have even commented how it's not good because criminals still carry 8+ rounds.
Reply
#14
District v. Heller affirmed that there is no militia affiliation required. It is the current law of the land, so if anyone disagrees with you on the founders' intent, tell them that even if they meant that a militia was required, it's now irrelevant.

Full decision here: http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/07-290.ZS.html

1. The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home. Pp. 2–53.

(a) The Amendment’s prefatory clause announces a purpose, but does not limit or expand the scope of the second part, the operative clause. The operative clause’s text and history demonstrate that it connotes an individual right to keep and bear arms. Pp. 2–22.
TheWolff, proud to be a member of pa2a.org since Sep 2012.
Reply
#15
Well regulated... they tell us how much water we can use to flush our feces down the toilet.. militia, defined by law as all able bodied males 17 to 45...

Done and done
Reply
#16
ExcelToExcel;69894 Wrote:Well regulated... they tell us how much water we can use to flush our feces down the toilet.. militia, defined by law as all able bodied males 17 to 45...

Done and done

That's not what well regulated means. And the second amendment is in the context of the Constitution, so the definition of militia as defined int he Constitution is what's used; not just any random law.
"As I lay rubber down the street I pray for traction I can keep, but if I spin and begin to slide, please dear God, protect my sweet ride."
Reply
#17
"The militia is the whole body of the people."

And as usual, Byblos is wrong.
Reply
#18
ByblosHex;69902 Wrote:That's not what well regulated means. And the second amendment is in the context of the Constitution, so the definition of militia as defined int he Constitution is what's used; not just any random law.

It doesn't matter what regulated or militia mean. We gun owners need to stop even pretending that it does.

Valorius;69925 Wrote:"The militia is the whole body of the people."

And as usual, Byblos is wrong.

Right or wrong, the use of semantics on both sides is a distraction. The Amendment reads "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed". Period.

Regardless what the beginning descriptive words say, the Amendment doesn't change.

"Banana-loving monkeys being integral to a healthy rainforest, the right of the (American) people to keep and bear arms shall not not be infringed". Same meaning.
Reply
#19
rmagill;69823 Wrote:
andrewjs18;69818 Wrote:it's extremely easy to want to 'do something' based on emotion rather than actually sitting down and rationally thinking about a problem and coming up with a solution to the problem, if one actually exists.

I think government should get rid of these dumb fucking gun free zones and the mundane laws about not being able to carry in and/or on school grounds for starters. second, I think teachers and faculty within the school system should be allowed to carry on school property if they voluntarily decide they want to.

on the flip side, I'm not too keen on putting cops in schools because then it becomes more and more like a prison system. being that I've actually worked at a school district where some of the schools actually did look like prisons (cops, bars on the windows and metal detectors on every single floor) with lockers and a lot of different rooms (various schools within Philadelphia), I think that it sets the wrong mental note to the kids within that school.

How about well-trained, armed, private security who do not wear uniforms similar to what police wear?

I'm ok with that, since private security has real accountability, unlike government police officers. even so, I think the gun free shit needs to be abolished. it's A LOT cheaper if teachers and faculty are allowed to carry in the school than hiring a bunch of private security.
[Image: quotes.php]
Reply
#20
andrewjs18;69960 Wrote:
rmagill;69823 Wrote:How about well-trained, armed, private security who do not wear uniforms similar to what police wear?

I'm ok with that, since private security has real accountability, unlike government police officers. even so, I think the gun free shit needs to be abolished. it's A LOT cheaper if teachers and faculty are allowed to carry in the school than hiring a bunch of private security.

Couldn't agree more.
Reply






Possibly Related Threads…
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Proposed ATF Regulation on Bump Stocks up for Public Comment sgtsandman 0 586 03-29-2018, 06:32 PM
Last Post: sgtsandman
  Indiana Legalizes Deadly Force Against Public Servants dc dalton 1 642 06-03-2013, 12:42 PM
Last Post: PisnNapalm
  Toomey responds to defeat "The Public Safety & 2A Rights Protection Act" soberbyker 4 1,095 04-20-2013, 04:58 PM
Last Post: nomad
  Delaware Senate Bill 37 (AWB) Emoticon 4 1,288 04-05-2013, 02:19 AM
Last Post: panopticonisi
  Video: The Constitution Did Not Guarantee Public Safety - It Guaranteed Liberty Jon Doe 1 774 03-21-2013, 03:04 PM
Last Post: rmagill



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)

Software by MyBB, © 2002-2015 MyBB Group.
Template by Modogodo Design.