Another start to the school year, another shooting; nothing will change

#878
#878
InVOLuntary said:
So our founding fathers meant for the citizenry to have weapons to go against an oppressive government. The government has M4 automatic weapons as a standard issue rifle. Do you think our founding fathers meant for the citizenry to fight the government with shotguns?

An AR-15 isn't close to a weapon of war. It's a semi automatic sporting rifle.

Remember, the 2nd amendment wasn't adopted hunt or even self defense. It was placed there to keep the government in check.
Click to expand...
I do not think the average citizen should have access to nukes or anti-aircraft weaponry.

I'm confident the founders would feel the same way.
 
#879
#879
InVOLuntary said:
Luther wants every gun banned. This has nothing to do with public safety. It has to do with what he wants his government to do.. oppress dissenting ideals.
Click to expand...
That's simply stupid. If that is indicative of your level of understanding, then you're not worth the time.
 
#880
#880
luthervol said:
I do not think the average citizen should have access to nukes or anti-aircraft weaponry.

I'm confident the founders would feel the same way.
Click to expand...
If only you worried about the founders opinions on so many other matters. Guess it's easier when you can just make up agreement instead of reading their actual words
 
#881
#881
utvolpj said:
If only you worried about the founders opinions on so many other matters. Guess it's easier when you can just make up agreement instead of reading their actual words
Click to expand...
?????
Do you believe the founders would want the average citizen to have easy access to nukes, grenades, and anti-aircraft weapons?
If so - we completely disagree.
If not - we are not that far apart.
 
#882
#882
luthervol said:
?????
Do you believe the founders would want the average citizen to have easy access to nukes, grenades, and anti-aircraft weapons?
If so - we completely disagree.
If not - we are not that far apart.
Click to expand...
I believe the founders would fear a standing army that's controlled by a massive federal govt that's controlled by the MIC more than an average citizen. But of course you have to take it to nukes when the actual discussion is semi-auto rifles in a black color. There is no possibility the founders would disagree with those and would most likely disagree with every stance you take on guns. I doubt any of them would have liked you really
 
  • Like
Reactions: MR_VOL, MemphisVol77 and LouderVol
#883
#883
luthervol said:
I do not think the average citizen should have access to nukes or anti-aircraft weaponry.

I'm confident the founders would feel the same way.
Click to expand...
We're not talking about nukes or anti-aircraft. Quit Kamalaing this up. We're talking about a sporting rifle. I'm 100% confident the founding fathers meant for the citizenry to be on an equal playing field as their government.
 
#884
#884
luthervol said:
That's simply stupid. If that is indicative of your level of understanding, then you're not worth the time.
Click to expand...
I've read your post for years. You've made statement after statement that you want government to do whatever it takes on several occasions. You are 100% what our founding fathers hated.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MR_VOL and C-south
#885
#885
utvolpj said:
I believe the founders would fear a standing army that's controlled by a massive federal govt that's controlled by the MIC more than an average citizen. But of course you have to take it to nukes when the actual discussion is semi-auto rifles in a black color. There is no possibility the founders would disagree with those and would most likely disagree with every stance you take on guns. I doubt any of them would have liked you really
Click to expand...
Not only would the founding fathers have loved me, I more than likely would have been invited to join.

So we all agree that a line must be drawn and that having a citizenry armed equal to the government (standing army) is insanity. Which obviously makes the debate nothing more than where to draw that necessary line.
 
#886
#886
utvolpj said:
I believe the founders would fear a standing army that's controlled by a massive federal govt that's controlled by the MIC more than an average citizen. But of course you have to take it to nukes when the actual discussion is semi-auto rifles in a black color. There is no possibility the founders would disagree with those and would most likely disagree with every stance you take on guns. I doubt any of them would have liked you really
Click to expand...
I've long been for reducing the size of the standing army.
Again, a point where we are in complete agreement.
 
#887
#887
luthervol said:
I've long been for reducing the size of the standing army.
Again, a point where we are in complete agreement.
Click to expand...
Yet you continue to vote people into office who expand our wars and destruction worldwide at the behest of the MIC. Your actions say you do not support that
 
  • Like
Reactions: MR_VOL
#888
#888
utvolpj said:
They also didn't believe in standing armies during peace. I don't think a citizen owning grenades would really scare them since that is who fought and won the war
Click to expand...

The Federalist faction of the founders believed in a standing army and a strong central government. I don't think any of that bunch believed in disarming the citizenry but the federalist were a dangerous bunch since most all opposed the BoRs.
 
#889
#889
luthervol said:
That was a legitimate question?

An AR-15 is more of a weapon of war than a shotgun, handgun, or knife and less of a weapon of war than a nuke, anti-aircraft gun, or grenade.

On the weapon of war continuum......an AR-15 is at 71%.
Click to expand...

Shotguns, handguns and knives have been used to kill more people in war than A-15s.
 
#890
#890
luthervol said:
?????
Do you believe the founders would want the average citizen to have easy access to nukes, grenades, and anti-aircraft weapons?
If so - we completely disagree.
If not - we are not that far apart.
Click to expand...

Some of the Federalist wouldn't but the majority of the others, you know the ones that won the fight to include a BoRs wouldn't have an issue.
 
#891
#891
luthervol said:
Not only would the founding fathers have loved me, I more than likely would have been invited to join.

So we all agree that a line must be drawn and that having a citizenry armed equal to the government (standing army) is insanity. Which obviously makes the debate nothing more than where to draw that necessary line.
Click to expand...
Your 2 statements do not match at all. The founding fathers actually valued liberty and your overbearing govt control supported by an mercenary standing army is the antithesis of that.
 
#892
#892
utvolpj said:
I believe the founders would fear a standing army that's controlled by a massive federal govt that's controlled by the MIC more than an average citizen. But of course you have to take it to nukes when the actual discussion is semi-auto rifles in a black color. There is no possibility the founders would disagree with those and would most likely disagree with every stance you take on guns. I doubt any of them would have liked you really
Click to expand...
This is my understanding in a really simplistic summary, of what the founders intended.

Arms such as rifles and side arms would reside with the people. Armies from the States when called answer and go to war. Armories would belong to the states.

The way the founders intended the armories would hold military weapons of war, cannons rifles to distribute for those that did not own them etc. basically what is needed to raise armies. All under the states control.

Somewhere along the way the federal government took away or was given control of these armories.

If the people do not have the means to take armories or military bases then they have no way to shed itself of tyranny. We can't ignore their intent, we're so close to being completely unable to confront a tyrannical government. A government that I might add is infringing ever more on citizens rights and ignoring many of it's obligations to it's citizens.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: MemphisVol77
#893
#893
utvolpj said:
But of course you have to take it to nukes when the actual discussion is semi-auto rifles in a black color. There is no possibility the founders would disagree with those and would most likely disagree with every stance you take on guns. I doubt any of them would have liked you really
Click to expand...
Agreed. There is quite literally no rational argument that can be made that the founders would not have considered the modern* magazine fed semi-auto rifle (the AR platform simply being the most common and flexible centerfire variant in this country) as the default personal weapon regarding the 2A. (including home defense and sporting applications)

*And by modern I mean the base description has been in use by American civilians for over a century now.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MR_VOL and MemphisVol77
#895
#895
utvolpj said:
Yet you continue to vote people into office who expand our wars and destruction worldwide at the behest of the MIC. Your actions say you do not support that
Click to expand...
Nope. My actions reflect my values...... In the grand scheme (big picture) - sometimes compromises are necessary.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top