NZ to announce gun amnesty

Haggis

CHB World Championship People's Champion
May 16, 2013
33,539
10,986
:patsch

Owning guns is a constitutional right in the US, as you know. I don't think this analogy works, dude.
A well-regulated militia is in the Constitution, sure. But that's not what you guys have, is it.

Also, the Constitution does not give you the right to unlimited semi-automatic assault rifles, which did not exist when the document was penned. But the Constitution was talking about a trained civilian militia. Why do none of you guys ever talk about that when you cite the Constitution?

And guns are cool, okay, we get it. That's fine. Bubonic plague samples are also cool, and can be used for things other than killing. Are you against bubonic plague samples being sold to any American adult for use in garage science projects?

While you're talking about the Constitution though - you're aware that the Constitution is a document of its time, is not the font of all worldly wisdom, and even can (and has) been amended? If you're citing the Constitution, well, once upon a time it codified the institution of slavery in American life, soooooooo..... they got it 100% wrong on slaves and it had to be changed, but they got it 100% right on guns for their time, our time and all future times? Is that what you're saying? :conf

:hat
 
Last edited:
Reactions: Dana and mandela

Haggis

CHB World Championship People's Champion
May 16, 2013
33,539
10,986
Why do they need the homicidal bloodthirsty vehicles of yesteryear, today? If transport is their sole purpose, why aren't people restricted to something like go-karts that are governed at the speed limit? When is the last time a crowd of people were recklessly mowed down by someone with a go-kart?
Are guns designed for target shooting, or for killing?

Why is it that none of you gun guys can ever answer this question honestly?

What's the purpose of SRT hellcats capable of 200mph with 700 horsepower?





View attachment 4895










Lolwut
You're right - planes can certainly be used as weapons of war.

Probably should be some sort of restrictions on what sort of planes civilian companies and individuals can own and operate, right?

John Travolta's private jet:



Clearly that's not enough, though. That jet isn't anywhere near as cool as a Stealth bomber with half a dozen live nukes attached. If Travolta can afford a Stealth bomber with half a dozen nukes, then the Founding Fathers wanted him to have that...... right?

:hat
 

Haggis

CHB World Championship People's Champion
May 16, 2013
33,539
10,986
What's the purpose of SRT hellcats capable of 200mph with 700 horsepower?
Killing people, obviously.

A roomful of people, individually targeted, to be killed as quickly and efficiently as possible and with as little risk to the driver as possible.

After all, that's what it was designed to do - to kill people. Right? :thumbsup

:hat
 
Mar 30, 2014
910
416
A well-regulated militia is in the Constitution, sure. But that's not what you guys have, is it.
Actually, D.C. v Heller (2008) established that individual gun ownership is protected by the Constitution unrelated to service in any form of militia.


Also, the Constitution does not give you the right to unlimited semi-automatic assault rifles, which did not exist when the document was penned. But the Constitution was talking about a trained civilian militia. Why do none of you guys ever talk about that when you cite the Constitution?
D.C. v Heller, again. It also states that gun ownership can be regulated. This was refined upon two years later in McDonald v Chicago; namely that the Second Amendment's protections in the individual states are incorporated by the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment.

And guns are cool, okay, we get it. That's fine. Bubonic plague samples are also cool, and can be used for things other than killing. Are you against bubonic plague samples being sold to any American adult for use in garage science projects?

While you're talking about the Constitution though - you're aware that the Constitution is a document of its time, is not the font of all worldly wisdom, and even can (and has) been amended? If you're citing the Constitution, well, once upon a time it codified the institution of slavery in American life, soooooooo..... they got it 100% wrong on slaves and it had to be changed, but they got it 100% right on guns for their time, our time and all future times? Is that what you're saying? :conf

:hat
I don't think anyone on here is saying the Constitution is the font of all wisdom. After all, we're sharing a forum with you, the human font of all wisdom. What you're referring to are the differences between people that view the Constitution as a living document; and originalism, which holds that if you want the Constitution interpreted differently than the Founders intended, you have to follow the steps laid out in Article 5.
 

tommygun711

You don't have the capability for mayhem
Jun 4, 2013
11,600
2,695
29
Actually, D.C. v Heller (2008) established that individual gun ownership is protected by the Constitution unrelated to service in any form of militia.




D.C. v Heller, again. It also states that gun ownership can be regulated. This was refined upon two years later in McDonald v Chicago; namely that the Second Amendment's protections in the individual states are incorporated by the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment.



I don't think anyone on here is saying the Constitution is the font of all wisdom. After all, we're sharing a forum with you, the human font of all wisdom. What you're referring to are the differences between people that view the Constitution as a living document; and originalism, which holds that if you want the Constitution interpreted differently than the Founders intended, you have to follow the steps laid out in Article 5.
Good post :good
 

Medicine

YOU HAVE BEEN EXPOSED
Jun 4, 2013
3,716
1,435
Blue Bell, PA
An AR-15's "main purpose" for existing is target shooting. Righto. :rofl

Why can't you gun guys just be honest? An AR-15 is designed for killing people. Why pathetically pretend that they are made for punching holes in pieces of paper? They are made to kill quickly and efficiently. What is the mental block on admitting that simple truth? I mean, you can go for a long drive and use the top of a car's engine to cook bacon and eggs if you want to. Tastes good too. That doesn't mean that a car is designed and intended to be used as a fucking frying pan. :patsch

:hat
You keep saying this shit about killing people...99.9% of LEGAL AR15 owners are using it for sport shooting or sometimes hunting and if needed Home defense. Im a gun owning American and I am telling you what we are doing with these guns... you are a foreigner who can not own these guns yet somehow you have it in your head that you know more about these guns and our culture then we do.
 

Haggis

CHB World Championship People's Champion
May 16, 2013
33,539
10,986
Actually, D.C. v Heller (2008) established that individual gun ownership is protected by the Constitution unrelated to service in any form of militia.
Fuck, I knew someone would call that. :lol:

It's fair to say that is heavily disputed, though. I mean, the Court said in the Heller ruling that "the adjective 'well-regulated' implies nothing more than the imposition of proper discipline and training."

Okay..... where is the "proper discipline and training" when 19 year old social misfit, violent criminal and open school-shooter wannabe Nikolas Cruz legally purchased his AR-15?

Or when Nancy Lanza legally brought a proper armoury and scattered half a dozen semi-automatic weapons around her house so that her lifelong severely mentally ill, murder-obsessed son could pick them up and wipe out a couple of classrooms full of six year olds? Clearly she has absolutely zero "discipline and training", so......... that's okay?

D.C. v Heller, again. It also states that gun ownership can be regulated. This was refined upon two years later in McDonald v Chicago; namely that the Second Amendment's protections in the individual states are incorporated by the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment.
Yep.

Can be regulated.

Just....... not even a little bit more than they are currently, it seems?

I don't think anyone on here is saying the Constitution is the font of all wisdom.
Oh, it gets talked about often enough that it seems it's often perceived that way. I mean, in this thread the pro-gun arguments have basically been "what about cars, they kill people too" and then "but the Constitution says I can."

After all, we're sharing a forum with you, the human font of all wisdom.
Hardly. :lol:

Been wrong plenty of times, and copped to it. Been right a few times too. Called the Iraq War being a never-ending foreign policy disaster when your arrogant cunt of a mate was all gung-ho for it, as I recall. Not that that wasn't very obvious ahead of time, to be fair.

What you're referring to are the differences between people that view the Constitution as a living document; and originalism, which holds that if you want the Constitution interpreted differently than the Founders intended, you have to follow the steps laid out in Article 5.
Yep.

So what's the problem? We're agreed that the Founding Fathers were writing about muskets and flintlock weapons, not AR-15s and Glocks. This is not the world that they lived in, and they had no way of anticipating what America's gun culture would become circa the early 21st Century. You're not exactly a dumb guy. You know the problem your country has with guns, a problem that is completely unique to your society.

And finally, to the pro-gun Americans who talk about "freedom" and avoiding government tyranny..... well..... how many posters here live in societies where the government can legally murder its citizens?

Just one group. The Americans.

How many posters here live in societies where cops routinely just shoot people dead for nothing? Just the Americans.

How many posters here have kids who have completed active shooter training in their schools? Just the Americans. Yep, your ideas on guns seem to be working out reeeeeeal well for you guys......

:hat
 
Reactions: mandela and Joe E

Joe E

Proud Shitholer
Jul 29, 2012
17,231
5,138
Fuck, I knew someone would call that. :lol:

It's fair to say that is heavily disputed, though. I mean, the Court said in the Heller ruling that "the adjective 'well-regulated' implies nothing more than the imposition of proper discipline and training."

Okay..... where is the "proper discipline and training" when 19 year old social misfit, violent criminal and open school-shooter wannabe Nikolas Cruz legally purchased his AR-15?

Or when Nancy Lanza legally brought a proper armoury and scattered half a dozen semi-automatic weapons around her house so that her lifelong severely mentally ill, murder-obsessed son could pick them up and wipe out a couple of classrooms full of six year olds? Clearly she has absolutely zero "discipline and training", so......... that's okay?



Yep.

Can be regulated.

Just....... not even a little bit more than they are currently, it seems?



Oh, it gets talked about often enough that it seems it's often perceived that way. I mean, in this thread the pro-gun arguments have basically been "what about cars, they kill people too" and then "but the Constitution says I can."



Hardly. :lol:

Been wrong plenty of times, and copped to it. Been right a few times too. Called the Iraq War being a never-ending foreign policy disaster when your arrogant cunt of a mate was all gung-ho for it, as I recall. Not that that wasn't very obvious ahead of time, to be fair.



Yep.

So what's the problem? We're agreed that the Founding Fathers were writing about muskets and flintlock weapons, not AR-15s and Glocks. This is not the world that they lived in, and they had no way of anticipating what America's gun culture would become circa the early 21st Century. You're not exactly a dumb guy. You know the problem your country has with guns, a problem that is completely unique to your society.

And finally, to the pro-gun Americans who talk about "freedom" and avoiding government tyranny..... well..... how many posters here live in societies where the government can legally murder its citizens?

Just one group. The Americans.

How many posters here live in societies where cops routinely just shoot people dead for nothing? Just the Americans.

How many posters here have kids who have completed active shooter training in their schools? Just the Americans. Yep, your ideas on guns seem to be working out reeeeeeal well for you guys......

:hat
Wiki is your friend, Rudder. D.C. vs. Heller. You knew it all along, didn't you?:rofl You're an expert, now? Little shake and bake? Just for fun define what constitutes a Constitutional Militia and the various, legal nuances between them. This should be fun. Wiki away, Rudder.
 

Slick Ric

Long limousines & jet airplanes
Apr 7, 2015
6,621
3,384
This relationship between guns and freedom is ridiculous too.
The founders of this country who, you know, used them to fend off a tyrannical government in order to create something far better for themselves didn’t think it was ridiculous. That’s why it’s the second amendment and not way further down the line. #1 freedom to say whatever the fuck you want. #2 freedom of the people to have the means to defend themselves against tyranny. I’d say it’s a pretty decent system, otherwise why in the fuck would your skirt wearing ass be here?
 
Nov 19, 2018
2,634
1,634
35
The founders of this country who, you know, used them to fend off a tyrannical government in order to create something far better for themselves didn’t think it was ridiculous. That’s why it’s the second amendment and not way further down the line. #1 freedom to say whatever the fuck you want. #2 freedom of the people to have the means to defend themselves against tyranny. I’d say it’s a pretty decent system, otherwise why in the fuck would your skirt wearing ass be here?
You have to ask why did you let a cantankerous scot into the country? He has only been there 6 months and wants to re write your constitution
 

Slick Ric

Long limousines & jet airplanes
Apr 7, 2015
6,621
3,384
What purpose do you own your guns for, then?

If you own an AR-15, what do you use it for? What was the reason for buying it, if you don't mind?

:hat
Because I can and because I want to... Same reason I own a record player, TVs, PS4, automobiles, etc.
 
Reactions: Clarence Worley

mandela

CHB Führer
May 16, 2013
22,120
9,827
Scotland
The founders of this country who, you know, used them to fend off a tyrannical government in order to create something far better for themselves didn’t think it was ridiculous. That’s why it’s the second amendment and not way further down the line. #1 freedom to say whatever the fuck you want. #2 freedom of the people to have the means to defend themselves against tyranny. I’d say it’s a pretty decent system, otherwise why in the fuck would your skirt wearing ass be here?
A constitution written hundreds of years ago is about as valid as the Bible, ffs.
 
Reactions: Joe E

Slick Ric

Long limousines & jet airplanes
Apr 7, 2015
6,621
3,384
So is the Bible, to some.

It's people like you that validate the stereotype that the entire world has about Americans being stupid.

Shame, really.
Except it actually is, in a legal sense, and you’re single handidly reinforcing the stereotype that Scots are a bunch of heroin addicted, skirt wearing fucking weirdos.
 
Reactions: Kolya and Joe E

Joe E

Proud Shitholer
Jul 29, 2012
17,231
5,138
Except it actually is, in a legal sense, and you’re single handidly reinforcing the stereotype that Scots are a bunch of heroin addicted, skirt wearing fucking weirdos.
You forgot dickless, wearing women's undergarments under their street cloths.