Yeah.  Double-edged word.

https://www.rawstory.com/2018/03/army-ve...-daughter/

Quote:Army vet who gave up AR-15s in viral Facebook post threatened with death and rape of his 14-year-old daughter

Quote:Speaking with Newsweek, Hemmert says that, while he received a flood of praise for his decision, that he and his daughter are now on the receiving end of “deeply disturbing” death and rape threats.
“I hope someone breaks into your house and rapes your daughter,” wrote one Facebook user according to screenshots provided to Newsweek by Hemmert. “While she is being raped I hope she looks up and says, daddy where’s the gun we built? Where!!!!”

According to the veteran, he has also received threats from 2nd Amendment supporters who say they are going to shoot his dog and that someone has been harassing his girlfriend by calling her cellphone.
“There has been a substantial negative and very ugly response,” Hemmert elaborated. “The thing that I have learned over the past three days is that there are a lot of unhinged people who own AR-15s, and I am convinced now more than ever that those people really should not be trusted with anything more dangerous than a butter knife.”

Can't argue with that.  Sick fucks with guns.

(March 20, 2018 at 10:57 pm)Minimalist Wrote:

---

Yeah.  Double-edged word.

https://www.rawstory.com/2018/03/army-ve...-daughter/

Quote:Army vet who gave up AR-15s in viral Facebook post threatened with death and rape of his 14-year-old daughter

Quote:Speaking with Newsweek, Hemmert says that, while he received a flood of praise for his decision, that he and his daughter are now on the receiving end of “deeply disturbing” death and rape threats.
“I hope someone breaks into your house and rapes your daughter,” wrote one Facebook user according to screenshots provided to Newsweek by Hemmert. “While she is being raped I hope she looks up and says, daddy where’s the gun we built? Where!!!!”

According to the veteran, he has also received threats from 2nd Amendment supporters who say they are going to shoot his dog and that someone has been harassing his girlfriend by calling her cellphone.
“There has been a substantial negative and very ugly response,” Hemmert elaborated. “The thing that I have learned over the past three days is that there are a lot of unhinged people who own AR-15s, and I am convinced now more than ever that those people really should not be trusted with anything more dangerous than a butter knife.”

Can't argue with that.  Sick fucks with guns.

---

It's a long thread and I may have missed it, are you for complete abolition?  Complete disarmament of the public?

I'm a strict constructionalist when it comes to the 2d Amendment.  This is what the FF had in mind.



No automatic or semi-automatic weapons in civilian hands.

(March 21, 2018 at 3:31 pm)Minimalist Wrote: I'm a strict constructionalist when it comes to the 2d Amendment.  This is what the FF had in mind.



No automatic or semi-automatic weapons in civilian hands.

Not to mention that before the reinterpretation, or as I like to call it the misinterpretation, of the second amendment guns were only meant to be owned and used by the militia.

People could own hunting rifles, shotguns or pistols.

Of course, in 1789 they looked like this:





Guns were also quite expensive.  Well out of the range of most people.

Quote:In the matter of reforming things, as distinct from deforming them, there is one plain and simple principle; a principle which will probably be called a paradox. There exists in such a case a certain institution or law; let us say, for the sake of simplicity, a fence or gate erected across a road. The more modern type of reformer goes gaily up to it and says, “I don’t see the use of this; let us clear it away.” To which the more intelligent type of reformer will do well to answer: “If you don’t see the use of it, I certainly won’t let you clear it away. Go away and think. Then, when you can come back and tell me that you do see the use of it, I may allow you to destroy it.


G.K. Chesterton - 1929

(March 21, 2018 at 3:31 pm)Minimalist Wrote: I'm a strict constructionalist when it comes to the 2d Amendment.  This is what the FF had in mind.



No automatic or semi-automatic weapons in civilian hands.

Was that an answer in preparation for an argument?  It doesn't seem very pragmatic.  I don't have any intent to argue.  I only mention it because I feel that 'No automatic or semi-automatic weapons in civilian hands.' will ever be a reality, even if it were policy.  At least not where I live. You should hear some of the things said by people around me, one even making plans to hide caches of weapons.  Crazy.

(March 21, 2018 at 3:35 pm)Lutrinae Wrote:

(March 21, 2018 at 3:31 pm)Minimalist Wrote: I'm a strict constructionalist when it comes to the 2d Amendment.  This is what the FF had in mind.



No automatic or semi-automatic weapons in civilian hands.

Not to mention that before the reinterpretation, or as I like to call it the misinterpretation, of the second amendment guns were only meant to be owned and used by the militia.

Who did that? The militiamen were supposed to bring their own pieces to drill.

---

(March 21, 2018 at 3:57 pm)rskovride Wrote:

(March 21, 2018 at 3:31 pm)Minimalist Wrote: I'm a strict constructionalist when it comes to the 2d Amendment.  This is what the FF had in mind.



No automatic or semi-automatic weapons in civilian hands.

Was that an answer in preparation for an argument?  It doesn't seem very pragmatic.  I don't have any intent to argue.  I only mention it because I feel that 'No automatic or semi-automatic weapons in civilian hands.' will ever be a reality, even if it were policy.  At least not where I live. You should hear some of the things said by people around me, one even making plans to hide caches of weapons.  Crazy.

I'm in favor of single-shot per load only guns of any type. One round per barrel, max two barrels for shotguns, one barrel for everything else.

Quote: I'm in favor of single-shot per load only guns of any type. One round per barrel, max two barrels for shotguns, one barrel for everything else.

All I'm saying is that when making a policy or editing the 2nd amendment, what citizens will actually accept, should be considered.

I agree that the 2nd is out of date, how could the FF's have known the atrocities that would be committed in the 20th century alone that are related to the essence of the 2nd. Disarmament of civilians was pretty much a precondition for lots of terrible things in the last 100 years.