That neighbor is a good question; one that I think wont be answered soon, if ever. If i had to hazard a guess Congress and SCOTUS would be the likely candidates for figuring out how well we can be armed , and they do regularly, well Congress does. SCOTUS has, afaik, ruled once on the 2nd Amendment and they favored the states interpretation of the Amendment. This was early in the 1900's.
I already posted a few quotes from our Founding Fathers as to what they felt the 2nd Amendment meant. The one that says it best was a co author of the 2nd Amendment, George Mason, who said during Virgina's convention to ratify the Constitution, "I ask, Sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people. To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them."
just to throw in a bit more craziness I have two more quotes one is a nod to Godwin and another is from our(if you happen to be an american) 3rd President.
"This year will go down in history. For the first time, a civilized nation has full gun registration. Our streets will be safer, our police more efficient, and the world will follow our lead into the future!" - Adolph Hitler, Chancellor, Germany, 1933
"The greatest danger to American freedom is a government that ignores the Constitution." - Thomas Jefferson
unfortunately the text of the 2nd amendment is lacking, way too many commas. however there is an intent behind those words and excessive comma abuse, and i feel that it is brought forth most by the quote of George Mason who helped to author the amendment in question. I personally believe that the individual interpretation and the state interpretation are both valid. the federal government should not have any right to take away arms from the states or the people and neither should the states have any right to take away the arms of the people. the amendment was written to give the people a way to guarantee their ability to fight against tyranny and oppression. Terror is one of the greatest weapons of Tyranny.
since you asked; i googled for founding fathers 2nd amendment and got
"I ask, Sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people. To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them." George Mason, Co-author of the Second Amendment, during Virginia's Convention to Ratify the Constitution, 1788
"And that the said Constitution be never construed to authorize Congress to infringe the just liberty of the Press, or the rights of Conscience; or to prevent the people of the United States, who are peaceable citizens, from keeping their own arms; â¦", Samuel Adams quoted in the Philadelphia Independent Gazetteer, August 20, 1789, "Propositions submitted to the Convention of this State"
"To preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them.", Richard Henry Lee American Statesman, 1788
"The constitutions of most of our States assert that all power is inherent in the people; that ⦠it is their right and duty to be at all times armed; ⦠" Thomas Jefferson, letter to Justice John Cartwright, June 5, 1824. ME 16:45.
"The best we can help for concerning the people at large is that they be properly armed.",
Alexander Hamilton The Federalist Papers at 184-8
i am sure all of those quote predate the NRA by a century or so.
I was trying to give a definition, not a translation. though it feels appropriate given my sarcasm to get sarcasm back for the sarcasm i gave to the sarcasm that i was responding to.
so all "rights" are permanent things forever inalienable and sacrosanct? then i put forth that as, i am at least, an american we have no rights. there is no specified time limit on the constitution however it can be suspended by instituting martial law or dissolved by the citizens of the us. the current eroding of our "rights" by the administration should show you that a "right" is neither permanent nor is it inalienable.
I just had this crazy image with using Alan Turning's name in place of that of the usual god or christ (at least for us backward western countries)
"Oh Turning! Oh Turning! OHHHH TUURRRNNNINNNGGG!!!!" or maybe "For Turnings sake! would you put that down!" or "ahhh Turning Damn It!" and finally "AHH OOH YEAH OH Turning yeah keep touching it like that, yes thats right ahh Turning that feels good"
The word "Clandestine" being associated with NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration) seems a bit... weird. I can't seem them spying on or killing someone for.. well anything.
giving citizens something with which to defend themselves is better than nothing. you are right a criminal will be a criminal, somethings you just cant stop from happening. but i'm not sure what the next step in escalation is after guns, AK47s, bazookas? you can still defend your self just as well with a gun vs an AK as you could if you both had a 6 shooter.
i would like to point out that while arming everyone will not deter determined criminals neither will disarming everyone. criminals would then use just physical strength and melee weapons to commit the crimes. even then with our borders being wide open as they are all it would take is a few people trafficking in illegal guns to overwhelm the whole of the populous.
you can not keep weapons out of the hands of the 'bad' people, just as you can not stop pirates from breaking DRM. it is an exercise in futility. what you can do is educate the people, show them how to defend themselves against those who would do them harm in situations where it is unavoidable and involve the proper authorities when possible.
i do have a small anecdote about guns a gas station and texas. a good friend of mine whom was a army ranger pulled into a gas station. that same moment a man stepped out of the station holding a gun waving it around; he had just robbed said gas station. he pointed the gun at my friend and began to walk towards him, presumably with the intent to take his vehicle and possibly do him harm, he had done so to the store clerk. this being texas my friend pulled out his pistol(he kept it under his seat in his truck) and shot the man three times killing him. he had robbed other gas stations, was probably going to do so again and my friend could very well been dead. anecdotal evidence, yes it is. but one of those things that goes through my head every time we make it harder for the common man to own a gun (make it harder for the common man to use his media in the way he wants) which does nothing to limit the ability of those who would illegally own a gun (those who pirate).
there i have tied in our 2nd Amendment to piracy and DRM, are you proud of me/.?
in the crazy above situation where some guy goes nuts and starts murdering everyone left and right i think that worrying about being shot is kind of redundant, he's going to try to kill you anyways. granted this is an edge case but still a very valid one. any normal criminal is going to think second thoughts about going about murdering everyone when anyone possibly has a gun on them, it equalizes the situation. guns take a lot less expertise than say a black belt in karate or akido so physical equalizers like that are much rarer. removing weapons from people doesn't make them safe, it makes them unarmed and easier targets.
I would like to make then the statement that strict gun control laws allow situations like Virgina Tech to happen with greater ease than would otherwise be possible. there now i shall be modded into hell.
My Apologies to Rostin for using his fact finding to make an argument for the 2nd Amendment advocating individual rights being a Good Thing(TM) (which I advocate, call me crazy)
i feel compelled to point out my own contradictions in logic, I used Charles Whitman as a flippant remark in the convo of melee and projectile accuracy. Charles Whitman committed his crimes in texas, and as i recall the student body did nothing to stop him, he was on a water tower taking people out at several hundred yards, that probably did not help matters as it were. there is a good bit of irony somewheres in there i think.
AFAIK Texas has gun carry laws, and have a lower incidence of gun related crime compared to other states with far stricter gun control laws. you are less likely to pull a gun on someone to mug them when theres a good chance the person your point the gun at has a gun him/herself.
imagine how far that kid at Virgina Tech would have gone if they had the same portion of the population carrying a gun as Texas.
picture being in a crowded area with a baseball bat, you wind up to swing and smack someone who is behind you, killing them; still a stretch but it is still possible to accidentally kill with even just a baseball bat.
never intended to imply that they can cause the same level of mayhem, only that even melee weapons can( though i do admit its highly improbable) hurt/maim/murder innocent bystanders, loose your grip on a bat and it flies into someone else and other such things, are possible, dismissing them like the AC that i first answered to is just being ignorant.
any and all weapons can hurt innocent bystanders, some are better at it than others, in the right hands most weapons can reduce any error in their use to almost zero, i mean look at charles whitman.
i agree with you, however if we are to take the EULA's seriously as a legal document shouldn't they have some lawyer going over it and making sure its correct? I can't see any lawyer who copyapastas too much and can keep a judge from laughing at him
all he has to do is be standing right next to him, how the hell do you expect to accidentally shoot a bystander? bullets move pretty fast, the bystander is going to have to be in close proximity to get in the way. i do admit i didn't exactly define all the positions of the actors for this scenario. granted it probably is harder to get in the way of a melee attack, however, it is still possible.
Also, a knife, a baseball bat, or the like.. they don't accidentally kill innocent bystanders blocks away. so i want to kill some guy and i run at him with a knife, you jump in the way and get stabbed and die.
i swing a baseball bat at the head of some guy with intent to kill and you get in the way, you die.
i fail to see your logic here.
...I think we should just go back to living in caves. have you been in a cave? those stalactites are scary! what if one were to fall down and kill/maim you! trees are no good either some of them are huge! no i'm afraid that caves nor forests are safe enough for these people.
okay i realize that this is a long thread and that i did not quote the parent, nor was i really explicit; i will not take my orginal post and add a word that should make it all clear. From:
AFAIK they do, they synthesize an audio signal. A guitar hero controller outputs only a "BUTTON 1 PRESSED" signal, nothing audio to that at all. To:
AFAIK Synthesizers do, they synthesize an audio signal. A guitar hero controller outputs only a "BUTTON 1 PRESSED" signal, nothing audio to that at all.
Slashdot Mirror
That neighbor is a good question; one that I think wont be answered soon, if ever. If i had to hazard a guess Congress and SCOTUS would be the likely candidates for figuring out how well we can be armed , and they do regularly, well Congress does. SCOTUS has, afaik, ruled once on the 2nd Amendment and they favored the states interpretation of the Amendment. This was early in the 1900's.
I already posted a few quotes from our Founding Fathers as to what they felt the 2nd Amendment meant. The one that says it best was a co author of the 2nd Amendment, George Mason, who said during Virgina's convention to ratify the Constitution, "I ask, Sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people. To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them."
mmm i thought it was the executive branch's job to execute the laws and the judicial branch to judge(interpret) the laws. funny that.
just to throw in a bit more craziness I have two more quotes one is a nod to Godwin and another is from our(if you happen to be an american) 3rd President.
"This year will go down in history. For the first time, a civilized nation has full gun registration. Our streets will be safer, our police more efficient, and the world will follow our lead into the future!" - Adolph Hitler, Chancellor, Germany, 1933
"The greatest danger to American freedom is a government that ignores the Constitution." - Thomas Jefferson
unfortunately the text of the 2nd amendment is lacking, way too many commas. however there is an intent behind those words and excessive comma abuse, and i feel that it is brought forth most by the quote of George Mason who helped to author the amendment in question. I personally believe that the individual interpretation and the state interpretation are both valid. the federal government should not have any right to take away arms from the states or the people and neither should the states have any right to take away the arms of the people. the amendment was written to give the people a way to guarantee their ability to fight against tyranny and oppression. Terror is one of the greatest weapons of Tyranny.
since you asked; i googled for founding fathers 2nd amendment and got
"I ask, Sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people. To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them." George Mason, Co-author of the Second Amendment, during Virginia's Convention to Ratify the Constitution, 1788
"And that the said Constitution be never construed to authorize Congress to infringe the just liberty of the Press, or the rights of Conscience; or to prevent the people of the United States, who are peaceable citizens, from keeping their own arms; â¦", Samuel Adams quoted in the Philadelphia Independent Gazetteer, August 20, 1789, "Propositions submitted to the Convention of this State"
"To preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them.", Richard Henry Lee American Statesman, 1788
"The constitutions of most of our States assert that all power is inherent in the people; that ⦠it is their right and duty to be at all times armed; ⦠" Thomas Jefferson, letter to Justice John Cartwright, June 5, 1824. ME 16:45.
"The best we can help for concerning the people at large is that they be properly armed.", Alexander Hamilton The Federalist Papers at 184-8
i am sure all of those quote predate the NRA by a century or so.
I was trying to give a definition, not a translation. though it feels appropriate given my sarcasm to get sarcasm back for the sarcasm i gave to the sarcasm that i was responding to.
sorry sarcasm must be met with sarcasm! ^_^
so all "rights" are permanent things forever inalienable and sacrosanct? then i put forth that as, i am at least, an american we have no rights. there is no specified time limit on the constitution however it can be suspended by instituting martial law or dissolved by the citizens of the us. the current eroding of our "rights" by the administration should show you that a "right" is neither permanent nor is it inalienable.
I just had this crazy image with using Alan Turning's name in place of that of the usual god or christ (at least for us backward western countries)
"Oh Turning! Oh Turning! OHHHH TUURRRNNNINNNGGG!!!!" or maybe "For Turnings sake! would you put that down!" or "ahhh Turning Damn It!" and finally "AHH OOH YEAH OH Turning yeah keep touching it like that, yes thats right ahh Turning that feels good"
yeah i've lost it
The word "Clandestine" being associated with NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration) seems a bit ... weird. I can't seem them spying on or killing someone for .. well anything.
just because you think its fact does not make it so.
i would like to point out that while arming everyone will not deter determined criminals neither will disarming everyone. criminals would then use just physical strength and melee weapons to commit the crimes. even then with our borders being wide open as they are all it would take is a few people trafficking in illegal guns to overwhelm the whole of the populous.
you can not keep weapons out of the hands of the 'bad' people, just as you can not stop pirates from breaking DRM. it is an exercise in futility. what you can do is educate the people, show them how to defend themselves against those who would do them harm in situations where it is unavoidable and involve the proper authorities when possible.
i do have a small anecdote about guns a gas station and texas. a good friend of mine whom was a army ranger pulled into a gas station. that same moment a man stepped out of the station holding a gun waving it around; he had just robbed said gas station. he pointed the gun at my friend and began to walk towards him, presumably with the intent to take his vehicle and possibly do him harm, he had done so to the store clerk. this being texas my friend pulled out his pistol(he kept it under his seat in his truck) and shot the man three times killing him. he had robbed other gas stations, was probably going to do so again and my friend could very well been dead. anecdotal evidence, yes it is. but one of those things that goes through my head every time we make it harder for the common man to own a gun (make it harder for the common man to use his media in the way he wants) which does nothing to limit the ability of those who would illegally own a gun (those who pirate).
there i have tied in our 2nd Amendment to piracy and DRM, are you proud of me /.?
in the crazy above situation where some guy goes nuts and starts murdering everyone left and right i think that worrying about being shot is kind of redundant, he's going to try to kill you anyways. granted this is an edge case but still a very valid one. any normal criminal is going to think second thoughts about going about murdering everyone when anyone possibly has a gun on them, it equalizes the situation. guns take a lot less expertise than say a black belt in karate or akido so physical equalizers like that are much rarer. removing weapons from people doesn't make them safe, it makes them unarmed and easier targets.
Thank You, I feel quite vindicated.
I would like to make then the statement that strict gun control laws allow situations like Virgina Tech to happen with greater ease than would otherwise be possible. there now i shall be modded into hell.
My Apologies to Rostin for using his fact finding to make an argument for the 2nd Amendment advocating individual rights being a Good Thing(TM) (which I advocate, call me crazy)
i feel compelled to point out my own contradictions in logic, I used Charles Whitman as a flippant remark in the convo of melee and projectile accuracy. Charles Whitman committed his crimes in texas, and as i recall the student body did nothing to stop him, he was on a water tower taking people out at several hundred yards, that probably did not help matters as it were. there is a good bit of irony somewheres in there i think.
AFAIK Texas has gun carry laws, and have a lower incidence of gun related crime compared to other states with far stricter gun control laws. you are less likely to pull a gun on someone to mug them when theres a good chance the person your point the gun at has a gun him/herself.
imagine how far that kid at Virgina Tech would have gone if they had the same portion of the population carrying a gun as Texas.
picture being in a crowded area with a baseball bat, you wind up to swing and smack someone who is behind you, killing them; still a stretch but it is still possible to accidentally kill with even just a baseball bat.
never intended to imply that they can cause the same level of mayhem, only that even melee weapons can( though i do admit its highly improbable) hurt/maim/murder innocent bystanders, loose your grip on a bat and it flies into someone else and other such things, are possible, dismissing them like the AC that i first answered to is just being ignorant.
any and all weapons can hurt innocent bystanders, some are better at it than others, in the right hands most weapons can reduce any error in their use to almost zero, i mean look at charles whitman.
i agree with you, however if we are to take the EULA's seriously as a legal document shouldn't they have some lawyer going over it and making sure its correct? I can't see any lawyer who copyapastas too much and can keep a judge from laughing at him
all he has to do is be standing right next to him, how the hell do you expect to accidentally shoot a bystander? bullets move pretty fast, the bystander is going to have to be in close proximity to get in the way. i do admit i didn't exactly define all the positions of the actors for this scenario. granted it probably is harder to get in the way of a melee attack, however, it is still possible.
i fail to see your logic here.
...I think we should just go back to living in caves. have you been in a cave? those stalactites are scary! what if one were to fall down and kill/maim you! trees are no good either some of them are huge! no i'm afraid that caves nor forests are safe enough for these people.some one please mod parent into the stratosphere please; we ignore the constitution way too often here.
AFAIK they do, they synthesize an audio signal. A guitar hero controller outputs only a "BUTTON 1 PRESSED" signal, nothing audio to that at all.
To:
AFAIK Synthesizers do, they synthesize an audio signal. A guitar hero controller outputs only a "BUTTON 1 PRESSED" signal, nothing audio to that at all.
Is that a little clearer now?