Citizens with guns

More
7 years 11 months ago #239025 by MadHatter
Replied by MadHatter on topic Citizens with guns

MAGNUS wrote:

MadHatter wrote: Further the milita is the written to be the whole of the male population of military age.


Where is this information coming from?


As I said the various militia acts but here is a wiki links : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Militia_(United_States)
The reserve militia[3] are part of the unorganized militia defined by the Militia Act of 1903 as consisting of every able-bodied man of at least 17 and under 45 years of age who is not a member of the National Guard or Naval Militia..

Knight of the Order
Training Master: Jestor
Apprentices: Lama Su, Leah
Just a pop culture Jedi doing what I can

Please Log in to join the conversation.

More
7 years 11 months ago #239041 by Lykeios Little Raven

MadHatter wrote: The second amendment states that BECAUSE we need well regulated militias the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. That clearly states that it protects individuals right to keep and bear arms. Further well regulated in context means well trained and disciplined. Further the milita is the written to be the whole of the male population of military age. Knowing what it means in the context of its time frame is important.
The cases of Columbia V Heller backs this. The various militia acts back this. The case of United States V Miller backs this. Finally this link explains the meaning of well regulated: http://www.constitution.org/cons/wellregu.htm

Yes, it protects the individual's right to bear arms but it also implies that this is for the purpose of maintaining a militia. I don't think most people buying guns have this purpose in mind these days. In any event I never said I thought that individuals shouldn't be allowed to bear arms merely that the amendment specifies that this right is given because we need a militia.

“Now I do not know whether I was then a man dreaming I was a butterfly, or whether I am now a butterfly, dreaming I am a man.” -Zhuangzi

“Though, as the crusade presses on, I find myself altogether incapable of staying here in saftey while others shed their blood for such a noble and just cause. For surely must the Almighty be with us even in the sundering of our nation. Our fight is for freedom, for liberty, and for all the principles upon which that aforementioned nation was built.” - Patrick “Madman of Galway” O'Dell

Please Log in to join the conversation.

  • Visitor
  • Visitor
    Public
7 years 11 months ago #239071 by
Replied by on topic Citizens with guns
All it says in the constitution is that a well regulated militia should be in place and that the right of the people to bear arms will not be infringed. It was never talking about just a militia, it just says a militia needs to be put in place and that and the people should have arms if they wish to, so they can defend against from their own government.

If that isn't clear, why were there so many back then that were allowed to have guns, despite not being part of a militia.

Please Log in to join the conversation.

  • Visitor
  • Visitor
    Public
7 years 11 months ago #239086 by
Replied by on topic Citizens with guns
Not to derail the train of thought, but firearms are tools. Firearms are not just used for shooting at people.

A lot of these United States are very rural. These tools are used to protect our livestock from predators. I live in an area where there is a lot of wilderness. It will take hours to get a Forestry person here.

As a police officer, when I respond to a call, I have no back up. The closest officer to come to my aid is 10-20 minutes away. The only thing I have is the Dispatching Angel in my ear monitoring the airways ready to bring me help if I need it.

Lucky for me, I live in a very patriotic area. Anyone who serves the community, Military, Fireman, EMTs, First Responders and Police Officers are very supported here. I know almost every home here has at least one firearm in it. I have my communities best interest and they know it. Which means that if I need help in the field, I have citizens that will come to my aid.

I teach firearms safety and training to my community. I want people to know how to handle and use these tools safely. There is an unfamiliarity with firearms that is frightening. We had clearing barrels(a 55 gallon drum full of ballistic rubber where you placed the barrel of the firearm in when unloading), in the military because trained soldiers inadvertently fired a chambered round when turning in firearms at the armory. Complacency is a terrible thing.

Magazine(not clips, that is a media term used by people who are not educated about firearms), size does not matter. It is a simple matter of convenience. I have watched active shooter videos in my training and most active shooters are in gun free zones and have all the time they need to change magazines. An unfamiliar or untrained person will take a longer time to change magazines, or completely run out of bullets and not realize it, which could mean the difference between life and death.

Hollywood movies make fire fights last minutes. For example, the 2012 movie "Act of Valor" showed Navy SEALs rescuing a hostage named "Morales". This is one of the most realistic scenes of combat in modern film. However, when the team "cleared" the room during shooting the director had to re shoot because the team "cleared" the scene so quickly that it was over before the audience knew it and was anti climactic for the movie.

The motivations of "bad guys" do not stop because of laws, or removal of firearms. If a "bad guy" wants to do "bad" things, they will find a tool that will accomplish the "bad" thing, whether it is a firearm, bow/crossbow, knife, explosive(IED), hammer, bat, pole, or whatever other improvised melee device. The hard part, and true focus, is seeing the indicators of the deed before they are brought to action and preventing it from happening.

Having police, military, national guard, and militia, is great, I know I have been part of them my whole life. However, they are not on every street corner and able to stop crimes within seconds. Even in the biggest cities it takes minutes, and minutes are far too long in a fire fight.

Please Log in to join the conversation.

  • Visitor
  • Visitor
    Public
7 years 10 months ago #239812 by
Replied by on topic Citizens with guns
Just a small thing here before I start, I can't speak for law enforcement, but u.s. military personnel are trained to shoot in pairs, not three round bursts.

I am very pro-2nd amendmen. Why? To start with, I am female, and thus am, on average, smaller and not as strong as a number of my male counterpart. Do I think only women should carry? No, every law-abiding citizens should have that right.

Moving on to rounds, I don't see a huge benefit in limiting legal access to large magazines. I also support hollow-points for a couple reasons; less likely to exit and possibly hit someone I don't want to, and yes, I will admit that I would rather a dead attacker than a live one at the end of the confrontation. Why? For starters, we live in a lawsuit-happy country where robbers have successfully sued the homeowners they were trying to rob. Plus, while this may seem paranoid, I don't want to possibly be looking over my shoulder once they're released.

On a different topic here, if we were ever to legalize the genocide of a group, through vote or executive order, I'd be joining the rebellion.

Please Log in to join the conversation.

  • Visitor
  • Visitor
    Public
7 years 10 months ago #240888 by
Replied by on topic Citizens with guns

MadHatter wrote:
Is it fear to own a fire extinguisher? Is it fear to own a first aid kit? Is it fear to buckle your seat belt when you drive? Is it fear to own candles and a flashlight for a power outage? Or is it knowing that bad things do happen and having the tools and mindset to face them can save you much grief in the long run.


Wow, this one just clinched it for me. I've always known that a gun is just a tool... a very deadly tool. In fact, the gun was invented as a tool to make it easier to kill. It is for that very reason that everyone should have a gun, keep it safe and know how to use it. If everyone had a gun, how many people would a shooter kill before being gunned down himself?

But more importantly, I'm so happy to see such a volatile topic discussed with such civility. You all are awesome.

Please Log in to join the conversation.

  • Visitor
  • Visitor
    Public
7 years 10 months ago #240889 by
Replied by on topic Citizens with guns

CableSteele wrote:

MadHatter wrote:
Is it fear to own a fire extinguisher? Is it fear to own a first aid kit? Is it fear to buckle your seat belt when you drive? Is it fear to own candles and a flashlight for a power outage? Or is it knowing that bad things do happen and having the tools and mindset to face them can save you much grief in the long run.


Wow, this one just clinched it for me. I've always known that a gun is just a tool... a very deadly tool. In fact, the gun was invented as a tool to make it easier to kill. It is for that very reason that everyone should have a gun, keep it safe and know how to use it. If everyone had a gun, how many people would a shooter kill before being gunned down himself?

But more importantly, I'm so happy to see such a volatile topic discussed with such civility. You all are awesome.


But by this same logic, every nation should be allowed access to nuclear weapons. They are just tools. They can keep a nation safe if that nations knows how to use them. If every nation had nuclear weapons, how many could one nation launch before everyone else launched there own? And what happens when North Korea gets their hands on them and decides not to use them responsibly?

The result is what we call "mutually assured destruction". Everyone loses.

I realize this is taking the argument to a ridiculous extreme, but it is meant to illustrate the point that dangerous tools are regulated and access to them is restricted for good reasons. Firearms are useful tools in the right hands, but if they were only in those hands, we wouldn't need larger magazines and automatic weapons. It is the proliferation of weapons into the wrong hands that has created the perilous environment we are in now, and escalating the firepower only escalates the risk of it ending up in the wrong hands again. SWAT teams are already driving armored vehicles, which will necessitate criminals obtaining RPGs in response. The cycle has to stop at some point.

Please Log in to join the conversation.

More
7 years 10 months ago - 7 years 10 months ago #240894 by Adder
Replied by Adder on topic Citizens with guns
A perpetrator will most always have the advantage of surprise and preparation as well, which can mitigate the capacity of response by others. So add that to the purpose built nature of the tool, to kill quickly, at range and without much effort... tends to work against it, tastes like a bit of a bad recipe IMO. The problem being, criminals are not always using logic or what we'd consider common sense to justify their actions and so often they seem unable to be realistic with the consequences until they find out the hard way - the problem is the impact they have on others on the way to find out those consequences.

I mean, a person could kill hundreds of people with a knife but its going to be messy, up close (psychologically), easily countered by less then lethal force, and take quite a bit of time - all of which makes it more difficult. I guess it has to be about drawing the line about the tools potential capacity at some level. Australia made it's mind up when a crackpot decided to shot 35 people dead and 23 wounded, at one point killing 12 and wounding 10 in less then 30 seconds. A tool yes, but they are tools to kill, so any argument about widespread acceptance is going to have wide ranging opinions
;)

Knight ~ introverted extropian, mechatronic neurothealogizing, technogaian buddhist. Likes integration, visualization, elucidation and transformation.
Jou ~ Deg ~ Vlo ~ Sem ~ Mod ~ Med ~ Dis
TM: Grand Master Mark Anjuu
Last edit: 7 years 10 months ago by Adder.

Please Log in to join the conversation.

More
7 years 10 months ago - 7 years 10 months ago #240895 by MadHatter
Replied by MadHatter on topic Citizens with guns

Adder wrote: I mean, a person could kill hundreds of people with a knife but its going to be messy, up close (psychologically), easily countered by less then lethal force, and take quite a bit of time - all of which makes it more difficult.)


Ok no, a thousand times no to this. A knife or edged weapon is NOT easily countered by less lethal options. A tazer is a one hit wonder that must connect properly to work and you better not miss. So its great IF it hits and you are gambling your life on one shot under stress. A baton against a knife you WILL get cut its not the movies where you do some fancy moves and take out the bad guy, OC spray may blind the attacker but does not get rid of the weapon but just has an angry and now flailing person with a knife. So the only less lethal option that MIGHT be good here is bean bag or rubber rounds which still require a gun and even then you better hope the person is not high on something because they still require pain compliance. So less lethal options against a lethal item are a fools move that will get you or those around you hurt. Im not trying to sound rude but I have a decent level of self defense and weapons knowledge and playing games with peoples lives is not something I advocate.
Edit:
In this video a man is tasered SEVERAL times with no effect and finally he is brought down by a tackle when simply distracted. This shows my exact reasoning behind the less lethal options against a lethal threat being a bad idea:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q5XqSDRGN_o

Knight of the Order
Training Master: Jestor
Apprentices: Lama Su, Leah
Just a pop culture Jedi doing what I can
Last edit: 7 years 10 months ago by MadHatter.

Please Log in to join the conversation.

More
7 years 10 months ago - 7 years 10 months ago #240897 by Adder
Replied by Adder on topic Citizens with guns

MadHatter wrote: Ok no, a thousand times no to this.....


In 1v1 sure, but how realistic is it to limit the analysis to that? A few guys can pretty easily tackle a knife wielder because they can accelerate to contact fast through the weapons effective range. This is much much much less possible with a gun, due to its range, and design to be be effective at range. Tackling is just one example of a less then lethal option.

Knight ~ introverted extropian, mechatronic neurothealogizing, technogaian buddhist. Likes integration, visualization, elucidation and transformation.
Jou ~ Deg ~ Vlo ~ Sem ~ Mod ~ Med ~ Dis
TM: Grand Master Mark Anjuu
Last edit: 7 years 10 months ago by Adder.

Please Log in to join the conversation.

Moderators: ZerokevlarVerheilenChaotishRabeRiniTavi