Colorado Movie Theater Shooting

Originally Posted by Maia 66

I agree with you 100% that the 2nd Amendment is outdated, because our government does provide us with security and protection

What happened on 9/11?

How can a million people per year simply walk (or run) across our southern border?

I read yesterday that Christan Bale visited some of the victims of the shooting.

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/7...g-victims.html

Originally Posted by Maia 66

Well, you said you lean far right... so I hope you're not getting your "news" from Fox. You'll find a boatload of misinfo there... but I digress.

Well, I don't lean far right, I just lean right in general. I'm far left on some issues, far left on others, and on most issues I reside somewhere in the middle. I don't really watch Fox News. I do sometimes, just for a different perspective, but I get the bulk of my news online or by watching NBC Nightly News. I always think of NBC as reliable, but that could be because when I grew up our local affiliate was NBC so that was the only local news we got, and thusly we kept it on when the local news was over and the national news began.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Maia 66
I agree with you 100% that the 2nd Amendment is outdated, because our government does provide us with security and protection

Originally Posted by far_east_man

What happened on 9/11?

How can a million people per year simply walk (or run) across our southern border?

Maia and I were saying the 2nd amendment is outdated based on the how the constitution states it. It states that militias were needed to protect our nation. We now have the armed forces for that. I don't think our own private citizens having guns with them would've helped much on 9/11. No one was prepared for the scale of what happened that day.

And I would argue the reason we have people coming across our border is because our government hasn't fully committed to protecting the border. Not that I want them to. This is another issue where I lean left.I can't blame anyone for wanting to get the hell out of Mexico with how crazy things are over there. I know they can do it legally, but we have made the rules so nearly impossible to do that. I think that, unless your heritage is 100% Native American, you have no right to complain about people trying to come to our country. Your forefathers likely came here to what they thought of as a land of opportunity where they could have a better life. Is it bad that people still think that? Isn't that part of what America is about?

Originally Posted by Hari's Chick

George was recovering from his cancer when his attack happened in England. Had George had a gun (did he not because of convictions- or England's gun control laws? I don't know), he would likely still be here. And I'm not suggesting he would have had to kill the intruder. He could have used it purely defensively as the situation unfolded.

I usually agree with everything you say HC but I'm not sure I do agree with this.

Yes George was doing well when he was attacked and it was a HUGE set back for him being stabbed like that. But I don't believe that if he had had a gun he'd probably still be with us. Unfortunately cancer is such a devastating illness. I don't doubt that the attack had a major impact on his health and it was absolutely the last thing he needed. But I don't think it made the big difference in his passing. Perhaps the timing of it but not the ultimate outcome of his illness.

Also just the stress of having suffered such a violation like that may have been enough to set him back also. Like say if he had defended himself with a gun and the crazy person didn't manage to stab him....maybe even then the shock of it and the fact that his secure haven had been intruded may have really knocked him for six and taken time off what he had left in any event.

Mere speculation of course.

Certainly, if he had had one, I could never begin to imagine him using it to defend himself.
He was armed with his mantra and Olivia with the lamp or vase or whatever it was. They both saved him that night!

This is kind of sad. When I went to see Dark Knight Rises, a guy stood up during the beginning. At first I was annoyed because he had every opportunity during the previews. Then I got scared. I kept my eyes on him as he walk down the aisles. He even pulled out a bag and dug around in it. My heart raced the entire time. I didn't relax until he returned and nothing happened.

Originally Posted by erinluv182

Maia and I were saying the 2nd amendment is outdated based on the how the constitution states it. It states that militias were needed to protect our nation.

Here is a great article called "The Second Amendment and the Fantasy of Revolution." I'm sure some people will dimiss it because it's from The Daily Kos, a liberal website, but it makes a helluva lotta sense.

Here's the gist of it:

Ignoring for a moment the paradoxical reality that the people who so fervently believe that they need assault rifles to protect themselves against our own military are so often the same people arguing that we should continue to spend more money on that same military than all other countries spend on theirs combined, the first conclusion anyone would come to is that a successful domestic insurgency would need far more than than an assault rifle. When the Second Amendment was written in the late 18th century, the main weapons of war consisted of muskets and flintlock pistols. There are two very worthwhile things to note about this period in weaponry: First, it would have been very difficult for any individual to walk into a crowded theater and commit a massacre with one of these weapons, mainly because by the time the shooter had managed to reload the weapon, everyone could have already run out of the theater, or even escaped at a leisurely stroll after pulling the assailant's knickerbockers over his wig. But secondly, a group of ordinary citizens, so armed and with the proper training, could pose a significant threat to an invading army, which would be comparably armed.

These days? Things are obviously somewhat different. This will become especially obvious should one find themselves face-to-face with an M1A1 Abrams tank with a Predator drone hovering above raining down hellfire missiles from the sky. One doesn't need field tests or a war games simulation to realize that even military-grade infantry weapons won't be very effective against that type of technological terror. If we're serious about enabling citizens to resist a tyrannical takeover by our nation's armed forces, it's immediately clear that we would need to start talking about legalizing far more than just guns.