Supreme Court to Look at 2nd Amendment

The murder rate in Australia was dropping before the Port Arthur Massacre, and now you have tons of illegal firearms circulating among true patriots. :salute:

Other interesting fact: Finland is the third most armed nation per capita in the world, but the vast majority of their homicides are committed with knives since they're more easily concealable. Those guys are hardcore.

Jam it back in, in the dark.

gang violence doesn't count cause its black people lol

There's nowhere I can't reach.

You can't really fault it, perhaps because what drives crime rates has nothing to do with gun laws.

Crime rates going down because of gun laws or bans is as unmeasurable as crime rates going down because of the availability of guns.

If there's no effective means of measuring the impact of a policy on crime then we're left considering its social implications. Is it ok to restrict freedoms in order to avoid a marginal amount of accidental death and suicide? What if we're also talking about a fundamental right?

Quote:

keyword was organised crime lol

Gangs are organized.

Most amazing jew boots

I do not see how we're any more free to shoot somebody in the face. There are laws against that, you know.

I am a dolphin, do you want me on your body?

Originally Posted by Traveller87

Exactly, so how does the right to own a weapon give you freedom, if you can't really execute this freedom? "Here's a gun, but don't shoot"?

Well, you can use the gun to shoot at targets, or shoot at animals with the proper licensing and seasons. You can also use it for home and personal defense, but if you discharge a weapon and injure or kill somebody you have to be able to demonstrate that they presented a believable threat to your person. It isn't like you can just invite somebody over for dinner, shoot them on the patio and then claim they were tresspassing.

In a more abstract sense, having guns gives us the ability to have an armed resistance in the event that the government ever went tyrannical on us, or if we were ever invaded somehow by somebody.

I was speaking idiomatically.

Soviet kit is military grade, as crappy as it is.

Most amazing jew boots

Of course, when the Amendment refers to the people it can be assumed that the people aren't just the people in the militia (national guard) and that their rights to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

Militias weren't just organized for the purposes of national security but state security (in fact that's mostly what they were for). By infringing on the rights of the people to arm themselves, it inhibits the ability of the states to field their own militias and inhibits their ability to practice armed dissent. When the state cannot afford to arm its citizenry, then the people must be able to arm themselves.

FELIPE NO

"Well regulated militia" is also the justification clause, and even if a justification clause no longer applies that doesn't mean that the actual right, to keep and bear arms, should be thrown out.

What, you don't want my bikini-clad body?