Another Obama Attack on the Second Amendment!

Page 4 of 8 [ 114 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next

Algorithm
Tufted Titmouse
Tufted Titmouse

User avatar

Joined: 4 Apr 2012
Age: 43
Gender: Female
Posts: 29

05 Apr 2012, 10:24 pm

ArrantPariah wrote:
visagrunt wrote:
Second, I'm not sure that surface to air missiles fall within the ambit of the Second Amendment.


The second amendment reads

Quote:
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed


Arresting someone for selling surface-to-air missiles would constitute an infringement.


It's interesting to me that no one has a clue that the states were given the power to keep the federal government from doing what they do...gathering power until there is so much stress throughout the system everything collapses. (Every empire, dictator, regime, etc in history is pretty good evidence lol.) According to the vague, dreamlike stupor Americans are in the founding fathers are paranoid conspiracy theorists and giving a few thousand men in the world the ability to control all arms, commodities, water rights, everything as well as the ability to define all enemies no questions asked is totally sane and intelligent behavior. Pretty sad they could learn so much from a history book and they never bother.



AstroGeek
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Jan 2011
Age: 31
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,582

05 Apr 2012, 11:09 pm

CoMF wrote:
AstroGeek wrote:
Cars constitute a massive amount of our CO2 emissions.


No, they don't, and they're a drop in the bucket compared to the CO2 emissions from electricity generation, heating, heavy transportation, and industry.

This really isn't the place to get into all of this. So I'll just address a few of your points. First:
Quote:
The transportation sector in Canada is a significant emitter of GHGs. According to Environment Canada, in 2007 transportation was responsible for 27% (200,000 kt of CO2 eq) of the total GHG emissions (747,000 kt of CO2 eq). Road transportation accounted for 69% 137,000 kt of CO2 eq) of the GHG emissions within the sector.
Source: Greenhouse gas emissions from private vehicles, see page 8, as numbered by Adobe reader (not numbers on bottom of page).

These stats are, of course, from Canada. We use a lot of hydropower up here, so our emissions from electricity production should be lower than those in the USA. (Although we have higher emissions per capita overall, so maybe that's not the case).

Quote:
AstroGeek wrote:
Let's just say I'd envision high speed rail in certain areas,


Powered by electricity generated by what source? You also realize that Maglevs aren't optimal for short distance or low speed travel, right?

I never said anything about maglev--it's still way too expensive. I'm just talking about conventional high speed rail. Once again, I'm thinking in terms of Canada (since it's what I know best) and for the time being it would really only be practical in the Quebec-Ontario region (there have been studies showing it could be done, if we were willing to invest the capital). Those provinces get most of their electricity from hydro and nuclear, both of which are relatively emissions free (yes, I know, you need to transport fuel to the nuclear power plant). Saving through increasing efficiency in other sectors would hopefully be enough to offset the increase in usage by high speed rail.

Quote:
AstroGeek wrote:
and regulation of what modes of transit could be used where.


There are already existing practical and economic incentives for not using a big honkin' SUV as your mode of personal transportation in metropolitan areas.

And yet some people keep driving them... But I was more referring to air travel in any case. Although I do like the idea of doing what European cities do and charging a toll for private vehicles to enter the city centre. The toll is then invested into transit infrastructure.

If you want to continue this discussion then you're welcome to copy this stuff into the Global Sustainability thread.



Last edited by AstroGeek on 06 Apr 2012, 9:43 am, edited 1 time in total.

Vigilans
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Jun 2008
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,181
Location: Montreal

05 Apr 2012, 11:10 pm

Nobody messes with my bear arms


_________________
Opportunities multiply as they are seized. -Sun Tzu
Nature creates few men brave, industry and training makes many -Machiavelli
You can safely assume that you've created God in your own image when it turns out that God hates all the same people you do


Joker
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Mar 2011
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,593
Location: North Carolina The Tar Heel State :)

05 Apr 2012, 11:12 pm

I like my guns but don't like baseball cards.



ArrantPariah
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Mar 2012
Age: 120
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,972

06 Apr 2012, 7:36 am

blauSamstag wrote:
ArrantPariah wrote:
visagrunt wrote:
Second, I'm not sure that surface to air missiles fall within the ambit of the Second Amendment.


The second amendment reads

Quote:
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed


Arresting someone for selling surface-to-air missiles would constitute an infringement.


Missiles aren't arms. They are ordnance.


Typical Liberal nitpicking. :roll:

The definition of ordnance is

Quote:
1. cannon or artillery.
2. military weapons with their equipment, ammunition, etc.
3. the branch of an army that procures, stores, and issues, weapons, munitions, and combat vehicles and maintains arsenals for their development and testing.


Ordnance is a subset of arms.

If our Founding Fathers did not want people and militias to have access to ordnance, then our Founding Fathers would have specified this exclusion in the Second Amendment.

Prohibiting the sale of ordnance to people represents an infringement. The Founding Fathers were quite clear: there shall be NO INFRINGEMENT on the rights of people to keep and bear arms. When subsequent generations of politicians, who think that they know better than our Founding Fathers, start putting infringements upon our rights, that will only lead to Communism.



ArrantPariah
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Mar 2012
Age: 120
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,972

06 Apr 2012, 7:46 am

Image



Vexcalibur
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Jan 2008
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,398

06 Apr 2012, 8:47 am

Cars and guns must be both exclusive for trained personal. They are completely useless for noobs and end up killing innocents. Most people just don't have the capacity to be driving cars. If you like to play cop or taxi driver just open a computer game window.


_________________
.


ArrantPariah
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Mar 2012
Age: 120
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,972

06 Apr 2012, 8:56 am

Requiring training would represent an infringement, and lead to communism.



Raptor
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Mar 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,997
Location: Southeast U.S.A.

06 Apr 2012, 9:07 am

Vexcalibur wrote:
Cars and guns must be both exclusive for trained personal. They are completely useless for noobs and end up killing innocents. Most people just don't have the capacity to be driving cars. If you like to play cop or taxi driver just open a computer game window.


Quote:
Cars and guns must be both exclusive for trained personal.

One is a licensed privileged and the other is a constitutional right; big difference.

Quote:
They are completely useless for noobs and end up killing innocents.

I have both and haven't killed anyone with them. Or have they done this on their own?

Quote:
Most people just don't have the capacity to be driving cars.
If you like to play cop or taxi driver just open a computer game window.

I don't know (or particularly care) what country you're from but here we have these things called jobs and no other way to get there for the most part. The ability to be able to go wherever whenever, in addition to work, is something you apparently have no grasp of, either......



AceOfSpades
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Feb 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,754
Location: Sean Penn, Cambodia

06 Apr 2012, 9:09 am

Vexcalibur wrote:
Cars and guns must be both exclusive for trained personal. They are completely useless for noobs and end up killing innocents. Most people just don't have the capacity to be driving cars. If you like to play cop or taxi driver just open a computer game window.
Are you sure it's most people or is it what I call a "significant minority" of people? Even 10% of people being idiotic drivers may seem like a majority since 1 out of every 10 cars you come across is still pretty common.



ArrantPariah
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Mar 2012
Age: 120
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,972

06 Apr 2012, 9:41 am

Raptor wrote:
Quote:
They are completely useless for noobs and end up killing innocents.

I have both and haven't killed anyone with them. Or have they done this on their own?


You haven't had your first kill yet? You must be a pretty lousy shot.

Raptor wrote:
Quote:
Most people just don't have the capacity to be driving cars.
If you like to play cop or taxi driver just open a computer game window.

I don't know (or particularly care) what country you're from but here we have these things called jobs and no other way to get there for the most part. The ability to be able to go wherever whenever, in addition to work, is something you apparently have no grasp of, either......


We also have things called feet, bicycles and buses. :roll:



Raptor
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Mar 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,997
Location: Southeast U.S.A.

06 Apr 2012, 12:42 pm

Not to point any fingers or anything but the word "troll" keeps re-playing over and over in my mind.....



Pyrite
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 Mar 2012
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,247
Location: Mid-Atlantic United States

06 Apr 2012, 2:05 pm

ArrantPariah wrote:
blauSamstag wrote:
ArrantPariah wrote:
visagrunt wrote:
Second, I'm not sure that surface to air missiles fall within the ambit of the Second Amendment.


The second amendment reads

Quote:
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed


Arresting someone for selling surface-to-air missiles would constitute an infringement.


Missiles aren't arms. They are ordnance.


Typical Liberal nitpicking. :roll:

The definition of ordnance is

Quote:
1. cannon or artillery.
2. military weapons with their equipment, ammunition, etc.
3. the branch of an army that procures, stores, and issues, weapons, munitions, and combat vehicles and maintains arsenals for their development and testing.


Ordnance is a subset of arms.

If our Founding Fathers did not want people and militias to have access to ordnance, then our Founding Fathers would have specified this exclusion in the Second Amendment.

Prohibiting the sale of ordnance to people represents an infringement. The Founding Fathers were quite clear: there shall be NO INFRINGEMENT on the rights of people to keep and bear arms. When subsequent generations of politicians, who think that they know better than our Founding Fathers, start putting infringements upon our rights, that will only lead to Communism.


Ah, so....does this cover nuclear weapons?



Vigilans
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Jun 2008
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,181
Location: Montreal

06 Apr 2012, 2:08 pm

A neighborhood watch in FuttBuckie, Texas is incomplete without at least one thermonuclear weapon in addition to Stinger missiles and automatic weapons


_________________
Opportunities multiply as they are seized. -Sun Tzu
Nature creates few men brave, industry and training makes many -Machiavelli
You can safely assume that you've created God in your own image when it turns out that God hates all the same people you do


Alexender
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Jan 2012
Age: 32
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,194
Location: wrongplanet

06 Apr 2012, 2:11 pm

Vigilans wrote:
A neighborhood watch in FuttBuckie, Texas is incomplete without at least one thermonuclear weapon in addition to Stinger missiles and automatic weapons


What about fully automatic rubber band machine guns?

Image


_________________
www.wrongplanet.net


Vigilans
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Jun 2008
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,181
Location: Montreal

06 Apr 2012, 2:25 pm

Now you're cookin with gas


_________________
Opportunities multiply as they are seized. -Sun Tzu
Nature creates few men brave, industry and training makes many -Machiavelli
You can safely assume that you've created God in your own image when it turns out that God hates all the same people you do