Can someone tell me where in the 2nd amendment it says you can carry machine guns?

[Brian37]

Far too many are. And unfortunately it seems you are too.

36,000 gun deaths per year is not a passing knowledge, that is documented fact.

Far right gun worshipers argue like theists, "what would you know about my holy book".

98 people a DAY die from use of a firearm. If America's collective attitude about firearms were sane, we would not be seeing those numbers. 

Same with economics coming from the right. If the rich always got everything right nobody would be bitching. If the rich got everything right, there would be no need for voting.

I am getting sick about "responsible gun owners", because this is about ATTITUDE not individuals, climate not individuals. And again, I cant even point to Gawdzilla, or my friend John who grew up with firearms. And you probably WONT read what the family of the inventor of the AR 15 said either. 

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/fami...ut-n593356

All I am getting from the far right is stonewalling and excuses to shoot more and sell more without regards to the 36,000 gun deaths on average per year. 98 deaths on average per day.

---

SCALIA, so you wont even listen to him when a GOP SCOTUS says it is NOT a free for all?

Just admit you are not for solving problems with gun deaths and it is all about protecting the object and not human lives.

What are you talking about? The post I replied to was incorrect - it said that we don't have an individual right to keep or bear arms. That is false. The Heller case confirmed that individuals have the right to own guns. McDonald confirmed that this right applies to the states. 

Heller also confirmed that reasonable restrictions are constitutional. Things like needing a license, NFA items require a federal fireams dealer license, restricting use in sensitive areas like schools and federal buildings. 

Our legal system operates on the concept of precedent. All of the briefs, arguments, opinions for and against - are now part of how future jurists interpret the 2A. 

I fail to see how you can conclude that I'm some kind of RWNJ. I'm simply communicating how gun laws work in the USA. As a gun owner I have to know a lot about gun laws, as ignorance of the law is no excuse. 

By your accounting, saving lives from heart disease should be your soap box. Annual gun deaths are peanuts compared to cardiovascular disease. Maybe you should admit that you're not for solving problems with cardiovascular disease and it's all about whatever solution you think you have for guns. 

Or let me ask you this - what is the magic number for gun deaths that would satisfy you and how do you get us there?

Our legal system once allowed slavery. Our legal system once denied women the right to vote.

Just because we have or can right now, does not make it a good idea long term.

I am really getting sick of that argument after REPEATEDLY and CONSISTENTLY saying this is not about RIGHTS but attitude. It is about one lobby and horrible fear mongering marketing. 

Magic number? The lower the better. The less deaths by firearm the better. Unless you think 36,000 deaths by homicide and suicide and accidental and domestic murder is peachy keen. 

But if you want to argue numbers, please tell me how many more firearms do we make and sell because we already average 3 for every human living here. Would 500 million firearms be enough? How about 1 billion firearms? FUCK IT lets make it 10 billion firearms. 

I get sick of saying I am not calling for a total 100% ban on every single firearm. 

I am sick of how people ignore our current climate and lack of pragmatism. I am sick of saying that the NRA is not the safety/rights org it once was. If it were still what it began as, I would have no problem with it.

Again, even on the issue of other things, such as government representation, there is a bullshit attitude of "less government no matter what". If we never grew government to represent a growing population and only had the original 13 colonies for the House and Senate in present day, you would literally have a minority dictating to a majority.

I am sick of the right  scaring the shit out of everyone using doomsday marketing on every subject, not just firearms. 

If all it took was "legal at time of buy" to reduce firearm death, and all it took was good intent, we would not see the high numbers of firearms deaths we do. It is a fallacy and flat out lie that only criminals are the problem. It is a fallacy and a lie that liberals are arguing for a firearm free society. It is a fallacy and a lie that it is legal vs legal, that is not the argument we are making. 

MOST firearm injuries and deaths are in the home and or with someone the user is familiar with. You can fly under the radar not having a record at the time of buy. You can be mentally ill but never documented at time of buy. You can be legal at time of buy and have a alcohol or drug addiction and never be arrested. You can be legal at time of buy but an child/spouse abuser who has never been arrested.

You can be legal with no record then go on to fuck up. Now again, I don't say that to call for an all out ban. I say that because and again, the user is more likely to hurt themselves or someone they know than they are to successfully defend themselves from a complete stranger.

In homicide cases, any investigator will tell you, they always start with the family, then move to friends and co workers because the people the dead know are their most likely suspects. Most firearm injuries and deaths start out with a legally purchased firearm. Kids and women in the users home and suicide are far more likely to happen than a stranger on stranger gunfight.

Unless you face those numbers you will not reduce the deaths.