Harleyman Posted July 26, 2015 Share Posted July 26, 2015 With due respect Harleyman, I doubt the efficacy of a firearm in practical self defence. More likely most would end up shooting themselves, or a member of their family. Feel free to convince me otherwise. Would you perhaps consider a training requirement and background/psychological check before issuing a firearm to a civilian? I think it's time that a psychological check should be required for all applicants for any type of firearm and a course in weapons safety. I don't see a rash of people who own guns getting themselves in the news headlines because they accidentally managed to shoot themselves or a member of the family do you? It happens but not that often considering that according to statistics there are around 87 million registered firearms in circulation Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whiteowl Posted July 26, 2015 Share Posted July 26, 2015 Thankfully no politician, even the President can dicker around with what is contained in the US Constitution. The Second Amendment grants citizens the right to bear arms. This bit always makes me smile, I've heard it so many times. You can't dicker around with the constitution..... You are familiar with what the word amendment actually means ? http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/american_english/amendment Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flamingjimmy Posted July 27, 2015 Share Posted July 27, 2015 you're joking right? Do you really think that armed citizens means the US army couldn't take over if it wanted? The most well funded military in the world? No, the argument that citizens need guns to protect themselves from the state is ridiculously outdated. ...yes Wow, you're even more of a moron than I thought. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harleyman Posted July 27, 2015 Share Posted July 27, 2015 This bit always makes me smile, I've heard it so many times. You can't dicker around with the constitution..... You are familiar with what the word amendment actually means ? http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/american_english/amendment Do Presidents pass Amendments? I always thought it was the Supreme Court or do Presidents tell the nine judges on the Supreme Court how to vote? ---------- Post added 27-07-2015 at 05:49 ---------- Wow, you're even more of a moron than I thought. Your opinion of me is about as significant as a pimple on an elephant's ass I may indulge in something of a rant now and then about the rights of gun ownership but your pontificating on the subject of atheism vs religion is the stuff of idiocy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unbeliever Posted July 27, 2015 Share Posted July 27, 2015 (edited) Do Presidents pass Amendments? I always thought it was the Supreme Court or do Presidents tell the nine judges on the Supreme Court how to vote? A constitutional amendment in the US requires the assent of both the Senate and the House of Representatives by a 2/3 majority. It then requires the assent of 3/4 of the state legislatures (38). It's pretty much out of the president's hands. All he can do is campaign for the legislatures to vote the way he wants. The supreme court interprets the constitution. Sometimes they are accused, with reasonable cause, of twisting the constitution according to their own ideology. This was all put in place to make sure that the constitution didn't get changed unless there is a clear consensus in the country that it should be. Edited July 27, 2015 by unbeliever Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Timeh Posted July 27, 2015 Share Posted July 27, 2015 Well for once you've got something right. Maybe my sense of humour has become Americanized over many years, either that or no one on this thread has a grain of humour in him or her You know that would have been nicer if you didnt feel the need to start it off with a snide comment. But yeah, some people do need a few lessons in how to have a laugh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Halibut Posted July 27, 2015 Share Posted July 27, 2015 By the way i think some of you are being too harsh on Harleyman. Ill bet good money he didnt mean it and was probably just joking. Ive no reason to defend him, im just saying it as i see it Crawler........ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Timeh Posted July 27, 2015 Share Posted July 27, 2015 Crawler........ :hihi: Thats not nice Funny tho Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cassity Posted July 27, 2015 Share Posted July 27, 2015 Well for once you've got something right. Maybe my sense of humour has become Americanized over many years, either that or no one on this thread has a grain of humour in him or her Conservative America has never possessed humour, in fact conservative anything struggles with humour, here or there. It's most likely you've always struggled with it or you've lost it because you've moved too far to the right. I don't think that anything you pass off as humour is in the slightest bit amusing even. I would say bitter and or contemptuous though...which probably has a lot to do with age and dogmatic rigidity...I've always considered this a waste on a humanistic level through unsound integrity and lack of good principles. You're incapable of delivering a compliment without dressing it up as an insult. Americans have always been able to laugh at themselves..especially the liberals. The problem is they've always needed to contain it or have it contained..anyone else laughing at what they find funny about themselves is a no go area..it's also why they find irony a little alien..thankfully progress is being made in that area as some great bold comedy and film are making headway. Which is a nice change from seeing America save the world every week. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psynuk Posted July 27, 2015 Share Posted July 27, 2015 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HZFLk5L70MQ "The only rational argument for having guns is, 'eff off, I like guns' which is fine." All the rubbish about protecting yourself from a tyrannical government is just that, rubbish. You can't fight drones and tanks with walmart firearms. Basically Harleyman, what your (not) saying as usual is your quite prepared to suffer the periodic slaughter of schoolchildren, church and cinema goers to keep 'your' defunct centuries old ideals alive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now