Joe Biden on Gun Control (1 Viewer)

[Beach Friends]

While saying he supports the Second Amendment, Biden called the absolutist arguments of some gun-rights supporters “bizarre.” Noting people can’t own machine guns or bazookas, Biden said, “Why should we allow people to have military-style weapons including pistols with 9-mm bullets and can hold 10 or more rounds?”

Speaking at the ‘House of Amazon,’ Joe Biden gently raises company’s role in middle-class job losses

Joe Biden raked in campaign cash at two private Seattle fundraisers on Friday, including one at the home of a top Amazon executive, where the former vice president ever-so-gently raised the role the company has played in the loss of...

www.seattletimes.com

IMO, if Biden wants to persuade people, including those who want to retain the right to own weapons for self defense, he really should learn more about guns. Based on prior statements as well those he made in the linked article, he seems hung up on the idea that a shotgun is the correct weapon for personal defense, and that a 2-3 round capacity is adequate. Furthermore, when he throws out "9mm" as if it is some unusually lethal round, he really sounds as though he is, at best, willfully ignorant and can't be trusted when it comes to legislation restricting gun ownership.

 

[Dragon]

Biden's statement was silly.

You can legally hunt geese.

You can't legally hunt humans.

So the Geese which can be hunted gets better protection than humans? That makes sense

We had a similar case where a hunter lost his license. He shot an endangered wolf. His defense was that the kill should not cause him to lose his hunting license (and his license to own a gun since they are connected) due to the kill not being a violation of the hunting laws but of the endangered species laws...

 

[brandon]

Anyone behind the person shot.

What if you miss and hit the person behind the target?

Oops.

 

[Beach Friends]

So the Geese which can be hunted gets better protection than humans? That makes sense

It's legal to hunt geese.

It's illegal to hunt humans.

How are geese more legally protected than humans?

 

[Beach Friends]

What if you miss and hit the person behind the target?

Oops.

In the hands of an experienced shooter the hollow point is the safer choice for him, when members of his family may be in the next room or behind the intruder with the knife within arms reach of his child.

Why should he have to use a round that is LESS safe for his purposes?

 

[Archies Ghost]

As far as I can read there is nothing in that statement which prohibits mandatory gun training and background checks to ensure that whoever get the guns both are able to use them in a safe way, know how to keep them safe and do not have issues like prior criminal records og records of psycological problems. There is also not anything which prohibits gunregistration to ensure that all guns are accounted for.

A Car need a registration, so that the driver can be held accountable for driving violations, so why should a gun not meet the same requirements?

And to go back to the Biden article - the point he makes really shows how crazy this is

Mentioning his own shotgun ownership, Biden talked about Delaware goose-hunting restrictions that limit hunters to three shotgun shells. “We protect geese from Canada more than we do people,” he said.

You are applying the modern meaning for the words in the amendment.

In the context of 18th century language usage and with the knowledge of why the amendment was considered necessary, it is fairly obvious that the founders intended for everyone to have unfettered access to weapons and the freedom to maintain proficiency with those arms without ANY interference from the government.

 

[The moose]

An armed populace need not have parity with the government to effectively prevent that government from attempting the worst forms of abuse.

***************************************************************
The idea that asymmetry in military capability is the deciding factor in armed conflict is demonstrably false. The American Revolution is proof of that and there are many more conflicts that amply demonstrate the point.

Vietnam springs to mind as an obvious example. Our endless GWOT is another easy example.

Your own example of the lethal aid provided to Ukraine demonstrates effective asymmetry of capability deterring a foe.

Russia is acknowledged to far exceed the military capability of Ukraine, yet a small number of anti-tank missiles have proven effective.

***************************************************************************
As for warfare on American soil, one can easily argue that the GWOT is fought daily on American soil. The 9/11 attacks certainly were.

WWII saw Pearl Harbor, ineffective Japanese attacks on the west coast, substantially more effective operations in Alaska. Thousands of merchant mariners as well as Allied military fought and many died in US territorial waters.

*********************************************************************

The purpose of the Second Amendment is to provide a check on the worst inclinations of our ruling class. In order to do that, the arms must be freely available and not subject to restrictions that decrease their effectiveness.

Restricting the government from confiscating those weapons from persons it deems "unfit" is a first principle that must be defended.

I knew you would bring up pearl harbor. HI was not a state yet not till 59.

I would agree that terror attacks have happened yet not by another nation. If it was another nation then why did we not go to war with Saudi Arabia? They were Saudi people that carried it out except for like four guys.


I get you really think a militia is a viable option but it is not.

Vietnam was forever ago. The arms used then compared to now are apples to grapefruit.

In all reality a militia is pointless in this day and age.

So how would you suggest to slow down the gun violence?

 

[The moose]

In the hands of an experienced shooter the hollow point is the safer choice for him, when members of his family may be in the next room or behind the intruder with the knife within arms reach of his child.

Why should he have to use a round that is LESS safe for his purposes?

I would agree with you if said shooter was trained and worked in a line of work that requires serious range time.

The average guy with a gun in pressure situation will not be exceptionally accurate.

I sure hope you are as accurate as drew Brees while shooting.

 

[Dragon]

You are applying the modern meaning for the words in the amendment.

In the context of 18th century language usage and with the knowledge of why the amendment was considered necessary, it is fairly obvious that the founders intended for everyone to have unfettered access to weapons and the freedom to maintain proficiency with those arms without ANY interference from the government.

We are living in a modern world with modern weapons and modern law enforcement services. Admenments have been made to the constitution many times to reflect the changes in society, technology and moral code. Staying with an 17th century interpretation in the 21st century may be where the whole problem is.

 

[The moose]

You are applying the modern meaning for the words in the amendment.

In the context of 18th century language usage and with the knowledge of why the amendment was considered necessary, it is fairly obvious that the founders intended for everyone to have unfettered access to weapons and the freedom to maintain proficiency with those arms without ANY interference from the government.

Yeah to hunt, kill Indians, and if another country came to try and take us over.

 

[Dragon]

The purpose of the Second Amendment is to provide a check on the worst inclinations of our ruling class. In order to do that, the arms must be freely available and not subject to restrictions that decrease their effectiveness.

Restricting the government from confiscating those weapons from persons it deems "unfit" is a first principle that must be defended.

Why do you see your own government as a potential enemy? In more than 150 years it has not been the case. I really don't understand the need to protect yourself from something that is basically your self. YOU elect your leaders by simple majority.

Let me ask you a simple question. Will you respect democratic (process - not party) decisions made by duely elected officials if they go against what you believe in?

 

[Archies Ghost]

Vietnam was forever ago. The arms used then compared to now are apples to grapefruit.

The AR-15 predates US involvement in Vietnam. 1958.

 

[Archies Ghost]

Why do you see your own government as a potential enemy? In more than 150 years it has not been the case. I really don't understand the need to protect yourself from something that is basically your self. YOU elect your leaders by simple majority.

Let me ask you a simple question. Will you respect democratic (process - not party) decisions made by duely elected officials if they go against what you believe in?

A lifelong study of history would be the short answer to the first question.

Your second question is poorly worded to the point I cannot directly answer it.

An elected official making a decision that contravenes his Constitutional duty and/or obligation does not make the decision legal.

If the people of the United States, following the Constitutional process, amended the Constitution in order to remove the 2nd amendment, I would then respect the will of the people even though I would not agree with it.

A good example of this is the income tax, something that was unconstitutional until 1909, when the 16th amendment was ratified. I don't agree with that particular amendment but it was accomplished according to the Constitutional process.

 

[brandon]

In the hands of an experienced shooter the hollow point is the safer choice for him, when members of his family may be in the next room or behind the intruder with the knife within arms reach of his child.

I know that’s the fantasy, but that’s just not how it goes down.

It’s dark. It’s 3am. You thought you heard a sound, but you aren’t sure where from.You grab your gun.

You see the intruder walking through the kitchen. You fire.

Whoops, that was your daughter looking for a glass of milk.

She would have survived if it were a through and through, but your hollow point led to her bleeding to death from internal injuries.

Oh, you waited long enough to confirm your target? Too bad, they shot you first. If it had been a through and through, you would have survived, but the intruder’s hollow points he had to go through the difficult process of asking the guy at Walmart for led to you bleeding to death from internal injuries.

Oh, you actually did shoot first? Too bad, you missed and he still shot you. And you died from internal injuries because it was a hollow point.

 

[Nebaghead]

I always like the Fantasy that a revolution against the government is going to stand a chance against a well trained military.
Also these same people are going to shoot the troops they are mad at NFL players take a knee against. Cops too? Who do you think will attack you? Nancy Pelosi, Bernie, Obama?
I enjoy shooting. I haven’t hunted in years as I hate the cold and am too impatient. I have no problem owning a gun but with the correct amount of background checks. Conceal and carry checks for Assault rifles would seem fair to me.

 

[The moose]

The AR-15 predates US involvement in Vietnam. 1958.

Yep it does.

And your point is what? It was designed to be a human killing instrument of the military.

It still is today. The sad part it is mostly used on innocent children and concert goers.

 

[The moose]

Anybody got a way the ghost or kit guns should be legal still or even why they were in the first place?

I know that is a tough discussion but git it a whirl.

 

[brandon]

Yep it does.

And your point is what? It was designed to be a human killing instrument of the military.

It still is today. The sad part it is mostly used on innocent children and concert goers.

Don’t forget the clubs and movie theaters.

 

[Archies Ghost]

I always like the Fantasy that a revolution against the government is going to stand a chance against a well trained military.
Also these same people are going to shoot the troops they are mad at NFL players take a knee against. Cops too? Who do you think will attack you? Nancy Pelosi, Bernie, Obama?
I enjoy shooting. I haven’t hunted in years as I hate the cold and am too impatient. I have no problem owning a gun but with the correct amount of background checks. Conceal and carry checks for Assault rifles would seem fair to me.

Its as if a large segment of our population pays no attention to the world around them and lives in an imaginary world where government is good and decent.

Riot police tried to disperse the crowds near the stock exchange, wrestling some people to the ground and beating others with batons. The mask-wearing anti-government protesters have been throwing bricks, Molotov cocktails and even using bows and arrows during the pitched battles in the streets.