DId the Maine shooter have the right to bear an AR-15?

Uncensored2008 said:
We have an epidemic of hyperbole and demagoguery by activists fighting to end civil rights.

Acts of firing AR-15's into "large crowd of people at innocent gatherings or schools full of children" are extremely rare.

If you are going to be killed by a gun, it's almost certain to be 9mm. After that a .22, then .38. then .45. You know what they all have in common? They're handguns.

But facts don't matter to you, you want civil rights ended, and ended now.
Click to expand...

They are not rare enough.
 
Matt Dillon said:
Why should clearly homicidal maniacs be allowed to run free in society? You support the government doing that?

FYI, the guy in Maine used an AR-10. Moron.

Guns are not the problem, crazy people are.

Also how the government currently handles crazy people is a problem as well.

In the past up until the 1980s these things were not as much of a problem at all.

Crazy people used to be segregated from society. Imagine that! :eek:
Click to expand...

And unfortunately, my favorite hobby is to blame for the massive rise in gun violence.

The rise of first person shooter videogames and mass shootings track exactly. From Wolfenstein 3D up to Modern Warfare 5914 - the two go hand in hand.

Extreme violence in movies and games are the undeniable cause of violence in our society.
 
Uncensored2008 said:
And unfortunately, my favorite hobby is to blame for the massive rise in gun violence.

The rise of first person shooter videogames and mass shootings track exactly. From Wolfenstein 3D up to Modern Warfare 5914 - the two go hand in hand.

Extreme violence in movies and games are the undeniable cause of violence in our society.
Click to expand...

Meh, IMO lack of teaching gun safety and discipline and morality is a larger factor.

Not to dismiss the video game factor, but I just don't see it being that large of one if children are raised right.

(and to realize that all that stuff is just fantasy)

Also putting kids on psych drugs is another factor.

This last guy was pretty old and a military firearms instructor. :dunno:
 
Jarod said:
I did not mention what gun that kook used.

Homicidal maniacs should not be allowed to run free in society, but until they commit a crime they have rights.
Click to expand...

Did you know there was a time when we used to involuntarily commit the criminally insane? For some reason we stopped, any idea why?

It seems that some viewed the safety of children in schools as meaningless.
 
Uncensored2008 said:
Did you know there was a time when we used to involuntarily commit the criminally insane? For some reason we stopped, any idea why?

It seems that some viewed the safety of children in schools as meaningless.
Click to expand...

We stopped because Regan wanted to cut the budget and give billionaires a tax cut.
 
Jarod said:
Thats already a law, since its not working, should we repeal it?
Click to expand...

Oh?

So then laws don't work? Criminals don't obey laws? If you disarm the law abiding citizens, it will have no impact on criminals?

Hmmm, you Marxists must have an agenda other than public safety behind your war to end civil rights....

In fact, y'all seem to promote violent crime - bigly.
 
Jarod said:
Oh, its part of the United States, under our Federal Umbrella. Governed by the rights given to the Democratically elected representatives in the Federal Government under our Constitution.

You see the United States of Mexico is a Country, like the United States of America. Chiwawa is a State in Mexico, like Maine is a State in the United States. People of the United States of America (me) do not get to vote in the elections of Los Estados Unitos de Mexico.
Click to expand...

Your grasp of Spanish is as pathetically abysmal as your grasp of law.

Estados Unidos Mexicanos.
 
Jarod said:
He had told people he was considering a mass shooting. The military division he was in knew of his mental problems. The police know of his issues....


Did he have an absolute right to bear arms?
Click to expand...

According to our tragically absurd constitution,
he has the right to bears arms even during the conduct of his crimes.

As long as he's a living American, his gun ownership rights are absolute
if the constitution is to be taken literally.


What's more---much more--- the constitution can no longer be amended
because the process to amend it requires more consensus
than this polarized nation will ever again have
for the remainder of its existence.
 
Jarod said:
The Constitution of the United States of America grants the Federal Government certain powers over the states. Maine was guaranteed a DEMOCRATIC Republic within those limits.
Click to expand...

ROFL

Your ignorance of our Constitution and the law in general is epic.

Traditionally, conservatives favor bottom up governance, where the people have to greatest political power. Electing representatives to govern in cities and towns who are directly responsible to the people. Towns and cities cede a small portion of the authority granted by the people to counties and shires. Counties cede a small portion of their authority to states. States then cede a small portion of authority to the federation, the federal government for the purpose of national courts and national defense.

democrats have a far different view, where there is a ruler, or group of rulers in Washington DC who hold absolute power. The Ruler will appoint barons, earls, ministers, secretaries, et al. to execute the will of the ruling caste on the many states. Governors are the rulers of the individual state, deriving their power from the central government and submit to rule by the central government. Counties must submit to the rule of the state, cities must submit to the rule of the counties, and the people must submit to the rule of every level of government.

The United States Constitution follows the conservative model of a representative republic. Probably the most telling feature, that you of the Marxist persuasion eradicated long ago is this;

{[FONT=Open Sans, Sohne Buch, Verdana, sans-serif]The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.}[/FONT]

[FONT=Open Sans, Sohne Buch, Verdana, sans-serif]Under the Constitution, the people retain nearly all power. Under the pseudo-feudalism that is "democratic socialism," the people have no rights, much less power.[/FONT]
 
zymurgy said:
that is a decision for the citizens of the state of Maine to decide the threshold for when his rights can be restricted. absolutes are always wrong :-)
Click to expand...

Maine has no authority to change the Constitution of the United States by itself. Further, it is not possible to remove the right of self defense, no matter how tyrannical or oppressive a government gets. The right is absolute.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top