Why register with the Steelers Fever Forums?
 • Intelligent and friendly discussions.
 • It's free and it's quick. Always.
 • Enter events in the forums calendar.
 • Very user friendly software.
 • Exclusive contests and giveaways.

 Donate to Steelers Fever, Click here
 Our 2013 Goal: $400.00 - To Date: $00.00 (00.00%)
 Home | Forums | Editorials | Shop | Tickets | Downloads | Contact Pittsburgh Steelers Forum Feed Not Just Fans. Hardcore Fans.

Go Back   Steelers Fever Forums > Miscellaneous > Locker Room


Steelers Fever Fan Shop

Doc's Sports Get FREE NFL Picks and College Football picks as well as Football Lines like live NFL Lines and updated NFL Power Rankings all at Doc's Sports Service.

Steelers Steelers - Giants Giants
August 9th, 2014, 7:30pmET

CBS
Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 07-31-2012, 04:41 PM   #101
SteelCityMom
MST3K Junkie
 
SteelCityMom's Avatar
 

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: In the land of The Crazies
Posts: 7,687
Gender: Female
Member Number: 16666
Thanks: 2,756
Thanked 2,399 Times in 1,123 Posts
Default Re: Shooting at Batman movie

And I still have to add (carrying over from the last discussion), that you truly do not believe in 2nd amendment absolutes, Vincent, or else you wouldn't say things like no Muslim in America should be allowed to own a gun. Not only would you accept that government restriction, but you actually are a proponent of it. (No, I don't want to get into the debate again as to why you feel that way)

I'm a big supporter of the 2nd amendment, but I feel you only support it completely when it suits your ideological needs.

You can't argue that the 2nd amendment is absolute in one breath and then talk about taking that right away from a certain group of law abiding citizens. It just doesn't work that way, and certainly does nothing to strengthen your argument.

And just to play devil's advocate here (though I do not agree 100% with this interpretation...I agree with it somewhat), here is an argument for why restrictions can be placed on gun owners.

"Not an Absolute Personal Right

The right to "keep and bear arms" as guaranteed by the 2nd Amendment is related to and a part of the right of the people to defend themselves when necessary, both collectively and individually. It is not an absolute personal right because there are no absolute rights. As Jefferson wrote:

"All natural rights may be abridged or modified in their exercise by law." --Thomas Jefferson: Official Opinion, 1790.

The right to keep and bear arms is a right which the people must be free to exercise in order to accomplish a specific purpose. If the Amendment was intended to make the right to bear arms a personal right in any and all cases, it could easily have used "person" instead of "the people" just as it did in the 5th Amendment when referring to the rights of individuals, and have had the 2nd Amendment read, "no person shall be denied the right to keep and bear arms." This, indeed, would be similar to the wording that Jefferson used in his proposed draft of the Virginia Constitution:

"No freeman shall be debarred the use of arms (within his own lands or tenements)." --Thomas Jefferson: Draft Va. Constitution with (his note) added, 1776.
Of course, Jefferson added the note (which is usually omitted by gun proponents) "within his own lands or tenements" in his final draft. As a personal right, some such limitation would be reasonable, and to limit a personal right to one's own lands or tenements would serve two purposes: it would guarantee the right to own the arms for possible use in a militia, and it would allow free and reasonable use to the individual for all legitimate purposes. If the 2nd Amendment were a personal right, then anyone and everyone could "keep and bear arms" indiscriminately. But when Congress stated the right to bear arms as a people's right, it implied that the people could themselves put in place some control over the exercise of this right in order to fulfil their own purposes. Congress was fully able to distinguish between people and a person when identifying rights, and did so on many occasions. But they made this a People's Right, incorporating into it the purpose that would be associated with the people's exercise thereof and leaving the possibility of other limitations that would not defeat the stated purpose.


Limitations on the Right to Bear Arms

Such personal rights as an individual has to keep and bear arms must coordinate with the principle use, i.e., the purposes of national defense and, under proper regulations, personal defense, hunting, and any other legitimate use of firearms. As a people's right, it is meant to serve a people's purpose. Therefore, there is no reasonable grounds for claiming an individual right to possess arms that serve no legitimate "people's purpose." Being denied the right to carry a concealed weapon, for example, does not necessarily infringe (i.e., defeat or frustrate) the legitimate purposes for bearing arms. Therefore, a law forbidding concealed weapons does not violate the 2nd Amendment, and the people through their legislature may restrict the carrying of concealed weapons if they so choose.

Only our inherent and inalienable rights exist independently of any government, and even those may be modified by law, although they may not be taken away entirely. To abridge or modify is not to take away altogether; it is to make reasonable regulation. While owning a gun is not an inherent and inalienable right, it is a right recognized by the Constitution. It may be modified and should be regulated by law, but it cannot be eliminated. To assume that any form of regulation whatsoever is a denial of this right flies in the face of the interpretation given to every other Constitutional right, none of which are absolute; all are subject to reasonable restriction to protect equally the rights of other persons.

Therefore, all ordinary citizens should be guaranteed the right to arms for all legitimate purposes. Gun ownership could properly be denied for any person convicted of a serious crime, for mentally incompetent persons, even for any person unfamiliar with the proper use of firearms. The people are not denied the right to keep and bear arms by intelligently regulating individual use. Persons who are members of a "militia" under the control of the people themselves through their elected officials, such as a National Guard, could be authorized to use weapons of war of all kinds appropriate for such a militia. Other citizens unattached to a "well regulated militia" have no legitimate reason to have or use hand grenades, machine guns, assault rifles, etc. For many people, the desire to own all kinds of firearms is understandable. Even Jefferson had this interest:

"One loves to possess arms, though they hope never to have occasion for them." --Thomas Jefferson to G. Washington, 1796.
But reasonable restriction on their use, while recognizing the purpose of the rights guaranteed by the 2nd Amendment, is in order for these modern times when arms have come to mean a whole new dimension of weapons from those the Founding Fathers contemplated at the time they gave us our Bill of Rights, and when the circumstances they contemplated for the use of weapons has completely changed.


http://eyler.freeservers.com/JeffPers/jefpco29.htm
__________________
People assume that time is a strict progression of cause and effect, but actually from a non-linear non-subjective viewpoint it's more like a big ball of wibbly wobbly timey wimey...stuff.


http://forums.steelersfever.com/image.php?type=sigpic&userid=16666&dateline=129531  3365

Last edited by SteelCityMom; 07-31-2012 at 04:55 PM.
SteelCityMom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-31-2012, 05:05 PM   #102
Vincent
Team President
Supporter
 
Vincent's Avatar
 

Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: People's Republic of North Carolina
Posts: 2,485
Member Number: 10927
Thanks: 13
Thanked 8 Times in 6 Posts
Default Re: Shooting at Batman movie

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vis View Post
Who says the sky is blue?
And in this case a blue sky equates to "shall not be infringed".
__________________

"We the people are the rightful masters of both Congress & the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution,
but overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution."

Abraham Lincoln
Vincent is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-31-2012, 05:12 PM   #103
Vincent
Team President
Supporter
 
Vincent's Avatar
 

Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: People's Republic of North Carolina
Posts: 2,485
Member Number: 10927
Thanks: 13
Thanked 8 Times in 6 Posts
Default Re: Shooting at Batman movie

Quote:
Originally Posted by SCMom View Post
You can't argue that the 2nd amendment is absolute in one breath and then talk about taking that right away from a certain group of law abiding citizens.
Are people that have declared war on us law abiding citizens?
__________________

"We the people are the rightful masters of both Congress & the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution,
but overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution."

Abraham Lincoln
Vincent is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-31-2012, 05:31 PM   #104
tony hipchest
IRONMAN a.k.a. Tony Stark
 
tony hipchest's Avatar
 

Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Give me back my game...
Posts: 38,020
Member Number: 658
Thanks: 1,440
Thanked 6,088 Times in 2,618 Posts
Default Re: Shooting at Batman movie

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vincent View Post
Are people that have declared war on us law abiding citizens?


isnt it the radical GOPers that have essentially declared war on liberals? i dont hear all this talk of overthrowing the government and how our world and greatest country is coming to an end when the right has power in washington.
__________________
tony hipchest is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 07-31-2012, 06:03 PM   #105
MACH1
Quest For Seven
Supporter
 
MACH1's Avatar
 

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Potataho
Posts: 13,858
Member Number: 3236
Thanks: 1,441
Thanked 4,325 Times in 1,620 Posts
Default Re: Shooting at Batman movie

Anyways back to property/business owners, it should be their right to allow or deny what gets carried onto the property. Using common sense of course.
__________________


ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ
MACH1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-31-2012, 06:49 PM   #106
Vis
In Hoc
Supporter
 
Vis's Avatar
 

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: SC
Posts: 7,001
Gender: Male
Member Number: 5117
Thanks: 493
Thanked 3,968 Times in 2,041 Posts
My Mood: Mellow
Default Re: Shooting at Batman movie

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vincent View Post
Are people that have declared war on us law abiding citizens?
I declare Steelers fans will destroy the government!!!


Now they can arrest Vincent.
__________________


All generalizations are dangerous.
Vis is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 08-01-2012, 08:28 AM   #107
SteelCityMom
MST3K Junkie
 
SteelCityMom's Avatar
 

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: In the land of The Crazies
Posts: 7,687
Gender: Female
Member Number: 16666
Thanks: 2,756
Thanked 2,399 Times in 1,123 Posts
Default Re: Shooting at Batman movie

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vincent View Post
Are people that have declared war on us law abiding citizens?
Sorry, but you're wrong.

The people you are referring to are not US citizens. And even in the instances of US Muslims 'saying' they've declared war (I'd love to see real documentation of that), that does not mean it goes for all of them.

Wars are declared by countries, not religions or singular people.

If a law abiding citizen (meaning someone who has never committed a felony), wants to purchase a gun, that is their right. Being Muslim doesn't change that.

And again, good luck rounding up all the people who believe in an idea.
__________________
People assume that time is a strict progression of cause and effect, but actually from a non-linear non-subjective viewpoint it's more like a big ball of wibbly wobbly timey wimey...stuff.


http://forums.steelersfever.com/image.php?type=sigpic&userid=16666&dateline=129531  3365

Last edited by MACH1; 08-01-2012 at 08:48 AM. Reason: pushed wrong button.:doh:
SteelCityMom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-01-2012, 08:48 AM   #108
MACH1
Quest For Seven
Supporter
 
MACH1's Avatar
 

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Potataho
Posts: 13,858
Member Number: 3236
Thanks: 1,441
Thanked 4,325 Times in 1,620 Posts
Default Re: Shooting at Batman movie

Quote:
Originally Posted by SCMom View Post
Sorry, but you're wrong.

The people you are referring to are not US citizens. And even in the instances of US Muslims 'saying' they've declared war (I'd love to see real documentation of that), that does not mean it goes for all of them.

Wars are declared by countries, not religions or singular people.

If a law abiding citizen (meaning someone who has never committed a felony), wants to purchase a gun, that is their right. Being Muslim doesn't change that.

And again, good luck rounding up all the people who believe in an idea.
Kinda have to argue with that one.

The Crusades.
Quote:
The Crusades were a series of religious expeditionary wars blessed by Pope Urban II and the Catholic Church, with the stated goal of restoring Christian access to the holy places in and near Jerusalem.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crusades
__________________


ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ
MACH1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-01-2012, 08:53 AM   #109
Bayz101
Renegade
Supporter
 
Bayz101's Avatar
 

Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Mansfield, Ohio
Posts: 7,678
Gender: Male
Member Number: 18856
Thanks: 1,214
Thanked 3,475 Times in 1,564 Posts
My Mood: Tired
Default Re: Shooting at Batman movie

Wow. Went pretty far back for that one.
__________________


"Either you're playing dumb, or it's not an act". -Judge Judy

No need to drive me crazy. I can walk from here.
Bayz101 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 08-01-2012, 09:09 AM   #110
Vis
In Hoc
Supporter
 
Vis's Avatar
 

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: SC
Posts: 7,001
Gender: Male
Member Number: 5117
Thanks: 493
Thanked 3,968 Times in 2,041 Posts
My Mood: Mellow
Default Re: Shooting at Batman movie

Quote:
Originally Posted by MACH1 View Post
Kinda have to argue with that one.

The Crusades.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crusades

The Pope controlled the whole church and the Vatican is a country. He could speak for the whole religion. No one speaks for Islam in that way. The Pope can't even wield that kind of power now.
__________________


All generalizations are dangerous.
Vis is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:22 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Shoutbox provided by vBShout v6.2.1 (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging v3.0.8 (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd. Runs best on HiVelocity Hosting.
Navbar with Avatar by Motorradforum
no new posts