James Madison Clarifies The Second Amendment

Submitted by: AntPharm 4 years ago Funny

Really makes you think about recent events...
There are 41 comments:
Male 676
I grew up around guns, lived in the "country" we were always shooting stuff. That being said, I completely agree with this. Civilians do not need to own assault rifles. You still have the right to bear arms (hand guns) but no one needs to own an assault rifle outside of the military or police.
0
Reply
Male 335
ya, those crazy people who want to keep their civil rights...
0
Reply
Male 5,413
Stop trying to put sense into the pro-gun nutters. It won`t work!
0
Reply
Male 2,357
[quote]only non lethal weapons[/quote]
This is oxymoronic; no such device exists. Every item has the capacity to be lethal. Lethality is imposed by the actor, not the item.

By your logic, knives, stones, baseball bats, crowbars, cars, etc. should only be possessed by the police and military. Again, an inanimate object is not inherently lethal nor is it a weapon; such properties are imposed by the actor.

Perhaps it would be wise to solidify your own thoughts before attempting to belittle CrakrJak.
0
Reply
Male 1,243
Oh CrakrJak, you do amuse me.
0
Reply
Male 1,243
Civilians owning guns is silly, most other countries in the world get by just fine with strict gun controls and have minimal gun related crime. Outside of the police and army only non lethal weapons should be allowed.
0
Reply
Male 2,371
Yeah `cause the Army and Police were a REALLY BIG help the other day. Glad we have those well trained policemen who are just smashing at showing up after after the bullets stop flying and saying brilliant stuff like, "Boy look at all these dead people." "Good thing this was a gun free zone or it could have been a lot worse!"

As an aside I read the next day of a guy shooting up a hospital. Cops got to him after he shot three but killed none. Funny how a hospital will almost always have a cop around due to the nature of police work...so there was a good guy with a gat who put a stop to the insanity ASAP.

I`m not blaming the cops in the first case as they can`t prevent most crime. It`s the nature of the beast. But posting crap in a video that leaves any and all gun rights to only police and the armed forces is plain nuts.
0
Reply
Male 3,578
this guy dosen`t know what he is talking about
0
Reply
Male 2,357
I should also state that the quotes and links are stolen from here: Source.

The article also details some of the events regarding the Oregon mall shooting last week. For instance, I find it interesting that the last thing the attacker saw before committing suicide was an armed citizen confronting him. The death toll was 2 (plus attacker).
0
Reply
Male 2,357
@patchgrabber: Definitely a bad thing as far as I am concerned. Of course, I`m not going to say that forcing citizens to purchase and possess something is good. Rather, I`d just point out one instance in where a increase in gun ownership directly correlates with a decrease in crime (since it has been argued extensively).

[quote]Also IAB for some reason won`t let you use the quotes and links in the same post.[/quote]
I once was blind but now I see.
0
Reply
Male 5,811
Also IAB for some reason won`t let you use the quotes and links in the same post.
0
Reply
Male 5,811
@HA: Not to nitpick, but your first link shows a town where the government mandated firearms as mandatory. Isn`t that just as bad as saying that no one is allowed a gun?
0
Reply
Male 2,357
@jtrebowski: What do you mean when you say "assault rifles or semi-auto machine guns"?

Citizens in the US cannot legally purchase firearms that discharge more that one round per trigger pull. A semi-automatic mechanism is one in which the firearm discharges a single round per trigger pull.

That all being said, perhaps you could clarify your stance a bit?
0
Reply
Male 2,143
Give the government your guns,go ahead. Baaaaaaa!
0
Reply
Male 3,364
CrakrJak: While I agree that banning guns altogether is not a realistic solution, I`m not convinced that it should be so easy for people to access assault rifles or semi-auto machine guns, etc... That being said, where Do the countries that you listed in your post rank when it comes to mass shootings?
0
Reply
Male 2,357
James Madison is rolling in his grave.

[quote">In 1982, the town of Kennesaw, Georgia, passed an ordinance which required all heads of household to have at least one gun in the house. The burglary rate immediately dropped an astounding 89 percent. Ten years after the law was passed, the burglary rate was still 72 percent less than it was in 1981.[/quote">
Source

[quote">A 1996 University of Chicago study concluded that states which passed concealed carry laws reduced their murder rates by 8.5 percent, rapes by 5 percent, aggravated assaults by 7 percent, and robbery by 3 percent.[/quote">
Source
0
Reply
Male 5,568
Draculya,
You CHOSE to be born in Asia?
0
Reply
Male 5,811
@Crakr: Once again failing to take into account that your country doesn`t count simple assault in its list of violent crime while other countries do. For instance if you only compare the crimes that the US considers violent crime, Canada is only at 233. But keep wearing those blinders @CJ. ;-)
0
Reply
Male 7,775
@CrakrJak, that`s because we`re a tiny island crammed with nearly 60 million people. A lot of which are Americans.
0
Reply
Male 10,339
What part of Asia are you from Drac?
0
Reply
Male 17,512


Wondering where America is compared to that list? It`s way down at 470 per 100,000.
0
Reply
Male 14,775
The second amendment and it`s stalworts are backwards. Arguing that you need guns to protect yourself against criminals is like mutually assured destruction for the intellectually challenged.

That`s one reason* I chose not to be American.

*Apart from:
Evil foreign policy
Lack of basic rights (the important ones)
Broken judicial system
Mounting social and debt burden
Rampant illiteracy
High violent crime rate
Social inequity
High global taxes
and others.
0
Reply
Male 10,339
"Also, if you miss, it won`t go through 6 walls and kill your neighbor."

Frangible rounds. Best ammo for indoor protection.
0
Reply
Male 15,832
[quote]I own a gun. A .22 caliber semiautomatic pistol.[/quote]
Actually, a .22 auto is an EXCELLENT home defense weapon. Because of its low recoil, it allows you to put several shots in your target in a very short period of time. Also, if you miss, it won`t go through 6 walls and kill your neighbor.
0
Reply
Male 10,339
I think I`ll just leave this here....


0
Reply
Male 15,832
[quote]"This guy is a total dickhole."

THAT`S JAMES MADISON YOU`RE TALKING ABOUT![/quote]
This guy wouldn`t know James Madison from Adolf Hitler. How do I know? Because he DOESN`T know James Madison from Adolf Hitler.
0
Reply
Male 76
I own a gun. A .22 caliber semiautomatic pistol. I keep it in the bedroom. I do not have assault rifles hidden in the walls, or shotguns between the mattresses. I think most people own guns for safety. I think the man who buys a gun with the intent of killing people is the rarity, and I think if more law abiding stable minded people had guns, carried guns, when some psycho dippoo decided to start free firing in a mall or a theater or a school, he`d take down a lot less people and there would be a hero, rather a bunch of victims.
0
Reply
Male 12,138
[quote]This guy is a total dickhole.[/quote]
THAT`S JAMES MADISON YOU`RE TALKING ABOUT! WASH YOUR MOUTH OUT YOU UNPATRIOTIC HERITIC! 8-)
0
Reply
Male 15,832
This guy is a total dickhole.
0
Reply
Male 363
There is only one true argument. Since these guns DO exist and since criminals do not obey laws, the only way to protect moral and ethical people is to have laws that allow them access to those guns as well. Sorry folks, NO TYPE OF PROHIBITION HAS EVER WORKED!!!! Just because it is illegal, does not mean they will not be available. Just unavailable to the law abiding. If the criminal has an AR-15 and I am only allowed my "hunting rifle" I will simply become a victim. No thank you.
0
Reply
Male 1,048
I`m going to go buy an assault rifle before it`s to late. I`ve always wanted to pull a rambo
0
Reply
Female 2,228
I think Mr. Madison just became one of my new political heroes.


As for me, a complete and total chick, I have to agree. You heard the man gentlemen, BARE THOSE ARMS!! *Loud Wolf Whistles*
0
Reply
Female 6,381
Maybe you could ban paranoids who think they need from protection from their own elected government (looked up FEMA on YouTube lately?). That would eliminate the vast majority of assault weapons in private hands.
0
Reply
Male 2,631
These are different times indeed; Only the stupid and slow moving need to worry about bears. Indians aren`t much of a problem- nor are the Brits- What we need to worry about these days is our increasingly corrupt and oppressive government, the `thug` police and crazed D.A.`s that want to throw EVERYbody in prison.
0
Reply
Male 13,624
I predict some arguing
Nothing new I guess
0
Reply
Male 10,339
Stopped watching when he said different times. It`s not a living document people. It means what it says.
0
Reply
Male 14,330
Someone who knows nothing about guns shouldn`t dictate their laws. This is a good example.
0
Reply
Male 4,298
You comment made me laugh for about a minute dbss. It reminded me of the stupid sh*t my friend Steve would whisper in my ear in high school that would send me into a giggle fit with everyone looking at me like I was crazy
0
Reply
Male 5,016
Good luck with that AntPharm, i think we allready know what lot of people will answer here. They all use same words as they have learned by heart some NRA vademecum.
0
Reply
Male 32
That`s not James Madison, it`s just some guy. Don`t be fooled.
0
Reply
Male 950
Link: James Madison Clarifies The Second Amendment [Rate Link] - Really makes you think about recent events...
0
Reply