The American Constitution

[John D Harris]

Originally posted by Donut: quote: Originally posted by Angelousss: Yorick your fundamental argument is wrong. If a suffiecent number of Americans wanted guns outlawed they would be. We have constitutional amendments that allow for changing times and circumstances. That is why the Constitution has persisted not for reverence of the founding fathers. We amended the constition to outlaw slavery. The found fathers while many were torn about slavery in the end chose to allow it to continue. The gun lobby is one of the strongest in washington, I believe they go to far but i am not for banning guns entirely.

Angel I think that Yorick's point is that the first line of defence for the pro-gun lobby is always that they have the right to bear arms as granted by the second aMendment. As if the constitution written over 200 years ago is sacrosanct.[/QUOTE]To us it IS, the U.S. Constitution is the foundation that every thing is based on. If you take away the foundation the house falls. Without a foundation everything can be tossed about by the prevailing winds.

[Animal]

Originally posted by True_Moose: If I am correct then it seems to me like the Constitution is not that much more than a set of very large guidelines...at least that seems to be its role here. It also seems like (no nationalist attacks here) that the Americans are really wound up with their constitution remaining the way it is. Sure it seems like ours is rather new (1982!), but there are changes going on frequently. Of course it's also not set in stone. Take for example, the 18th amendment (prohibition), or of course, the original constitution saying that a black man's life was worth 1/2 that of a white man. It does change, and things like gun control are addressed. BTW, I should mention that there were more children and adults killed last year in accidental discharges than there were intruders or used in self-defence. (not that I really want to get into that)

It seems as though Americans view their constitution as an embodiment of freedom itself. I've read great posts from both sides of the fence, and although I do not pretend to be versed in American history, I wish to put "my two cents" in as at were, from the viewpoint of a citizen of the world.

I live in Canada, probably one of the best countries to live in the world, or at least it was, but more importantly I live in the world. What happens in America affects me as does what happens in the Middle East, or Japan, or Europe. The economics of the world are so intertwined, it is inevitable.

The fact that a sniper is running loose in the US, killing at will is a testament to gun control. Oh yes, the same could be said if he were weilding a knife, but killing from a distance affords one a greater chance of escape. I'm sure Jack the Ripper would've been caught had he attempted to kill more. That however is not my point.

Gun control will never work period. It's a great idea on paper, just like communism is a great idea on paper, but is impossible to achieve given human nature. The problem, as I see it, in the argument of the US constitution, is that Americans, by your own admission, will never relinquish their firearms.

But I have to ask, why? Is it that you view it as a freedom being taken from you? But is it a freedom? Why is it a freedom, because it's written on a document that by owning a gun, you are free?

It was once accepted practice for well to do citizens to own African Americans as slaves, to be bought and traded, not unlike perhaps guns today. It was viewed as right then, but us completely unacceptable today. Why is it unacceptable today? Because one life is no more important than another. Because we are "more civilized now." Ask a slaver during the civil way if they were willing to give up their slave and you'd be given the same answer as if you asked a gun owner to hand over their weapon. No way.

So ask yourself, why is gun control such a bad thing? Does it really remove any of your freedoms? Perhaps you are responsible enough to own a gun, but what about your neighbor? Apparently the Washington Sniper isn't responsible enough to own a gun, but someone thought he was.

That same constitution that allows you own a gun, is also allowing the sniper to shoot whoever he sees fit. "Oh it could never happen to me," you say. I'm sure each of his victoms thought the same. Maybe his next victom will be your spouse, child or other loved one.

Gun control will never work, because people don't want it to work. I myself really have nothing against owning a gun. I do have a problem with people owning ammunition for said gun. If you like to collect guns, fine, no problem, but you sure don't need any bullets for a "collection."

Anyway, I feel I'm a little off topic here, and it's not intended to offend anyone, but once again, ask yourself: Do I REALLY need to own a gun? Is it going to improve my freedom to own one?

[ 10-23-2002, 12:23 AM: Message edited by: Animal ]

[John D Harris]

Originally posted by True_Moose: If I am correct then it seems to me like the Constitution is not that much more than a set of very large guidelines...at least that seems to be its role here. It also seems like (no nationalist attacks here) that the Americans are really wound up with their constitution remaining the way it is. Sure it seems like ours is rather new (1982!), but there are changes going on frequently. Of course it's also not set in stone. Take for example, the 18th amendment (prohibition), or of course, the original constitution saying that a black man's life was worth 1/2 that of a white man. It does change, and things like gun control are addressed. BTW, I should mention that there were more children and adults killed last year in accidental discharges than there were intruders or used in self-defence. (not that I really want to get into that)

The Constitution original said that for the PURPOSE (very important word) of counting the population to decide how many representatives each state shall have in the House of representatives. a negro shall count as 3/5 a person. Even the our founding fathers saw that slavery was bad and they tried to limit the power of the Southern States, by cuting the population count of slaves. The RESULT was less Reps in the House of Reps, for the Southern Slave states Therefore the southern Slave States HAD less power then they would have if the negros would have been counted as a whole person. Pretty tricky of those Evil White men, our Founding Fathers

[Yorick]

Originally posted by John D Harris: quote: Originally posted by Donut: quote: Originally posted by Angelousss: Yorick your fundamental argument is wrong. If a suffiecent number of Americans wanted guns outlawed they would be. We have constitutional amendments that allow for changing times and circumstances. That is why the Constitution has persisted not for reverence of the founding fathers. We amended the constition to outlaw slavery. The found fathers while many were torn about slavery in the end chose to allow it to continue. The gun lobby is one of the strongest in washington, I believe they go to far but i am not for banning guns entirely.

Angel I think that Yorick's point is that the first line of defence for the pro-gun lobby is always that they have the right to bear arms as granted by the second aMendment. As if the constitution written over 200 years ago is sacrosanct.[/QUOTE]To us it IS, the U.S. Constitution is the foundation that every thing is based on. If you take away the foundation the house falls. Without a foundation everything can be tossed about by the prevailing winds.[/QUOTE]If your walls are cracking you have to repair your foundations or the house will fall down. You even may need a new house, foundation and all.

What is so scarey about that? The unknown? Do you trust the founding fathers more than Americans alive today?

This is the issue at hand. Why? Why are the founding fathers anymore trustworthy than people today?

[Yorick]

Well said Animal. Thanks o' citizen of the world. [img]smile.gif[/img]

[John D Harris]

Ok, Yorick (I didn't quote cause it would have taken up the whole page )
The FACT still remains that there are suicides by means other then guns. And therefore people will kill themselves with or with out guns. Guns have never killed anybody just setting on the self, guns require human action, or stupidity to work. My guns have never shot it or killed another Human,if anyone doubts this fact they're welcome to come by so they can sit and stare at my guns until the guns get up and shoot on their own. Hell I'll even provide them a chair to sit in while they stare. They'll have to provide their own food I'm not going to feed somebody thats just going to sit on their rear end
As I wrote earlier the problem is the hearts of men, not guns. Worthless low life sacks of horse manure excuses for humans that wish to kill another human are going to find away to do it with or without guns.

[Yorick]

Originally posted by John D Harris: Ok, Yorick (I didn't quote cause it would have taken up the whole page ) The FACT still remains that there are suicides by means other then guns. And therefore people will kill themselves with or with out guns. Guns have never killed anybody just setting on the self, guns require human action, or stupidity to work. My guns have never shot it or killed another Human,if anyone doubts this fact they're welcome to come by so they can sit and stare at my guns until the guns get up and shoot on their own. Hell I'll even provide them a chair to sit in while they stare. They'll have to provide their own food I'm not going to feed somebody thats just going to sit on their rear end As I wrote earlier the problem is the hearts of men, not guns. Worthless low life sacks of horse manure excuses for humans that wish to kill another human are going to find away to do it with or without guns.

John. A few years ago I had the terrible experience of being in a house when someone close to me attempted suicide. Three times in one night. They hanged themself Hutchence style on the back of the door.

Three times I waited until they had passed out, and I broke down the door, removed the belt from their neck, and revived them.

Three times.

Each time I took the belt, but each time a new one was found.

After the last time, I scoured the house for belts and ropes, took all the knives I could find, and left.

They are still alive today.

Had they possessed a gun, they would be dead. For all intents and purposes, they succeeded in their attempt. Had I not been around, and forced my way in, they would be dead. Because it was not a gun, I was able to change the situation.

As I said, they are still alive thank God.

The gun is instant death. The guns sole reason for existence is to end life.

But I appreciate your view my friend. [img]smile.gif[/img] Peace.

[Animal]

Originally posted by John D Harris: Ok, Yorick (I didn't quote cause it would have taken up the whole page ) The FACT still remains that there are suicides by means other then guns. And therefore people will kill themselves with or with out guns. Guns have never killed anybody just setting on the self, guns require human action, or stupidity to work. My guns have never shot it or killed another Human,if anyone doubts this fact they're welcome to come by so they can sit and stare at my guns until the guns get up and shoot on their own. Hell I'll even provide them a chair to sit in while they stare. They'll have to provide their own food I'm not going to feed somebody thats just going to sit on their rear end As I wrote earlier the problem is the hearts of men, not guns. Worthless low life sacks of horse manure excuses for humans that wish to kill another human are going to find away to do it with or without guns.

So to stop that "worthless low life sack of horse manure" from getting a gun and shooting someone, sacrifices must be made by everyone. Would you be willing to give up one of your guns if you knew it would save a life?

You are absolutely correct, the problem is with men not guns, but some men are not smart enough to police themselves, and since no one knows who those people are, everyone must be policed.

Once again, I ask you, would you give up one of your guns to save a life?

[John D Harris]

Originally posted by Animal: quote: Originally posted by True_Moose: If I am correct then it seems to me like the Constitution is not that much more than a set of very large guidelines...at least that seems to be its role here. It also seems like (no nationalist attacks here) that the Americans are really wound up with their constitution remaining the way it is. Sure it seems like ours is rather new (1982!), but there are changes going on frequently. Of course it's also not set in stone. Take for example, the 18th amendment (prohibition), or of course, the original constitution saying that a black man's life was worth 1/2 that of a white man. It does change, and things like gun control are addressed. BTW, I should mention that there were more children and adults killed last year in accidental discharges than there were intruders or used in self-defence. (not that I really want to get into that)

It seems as though Americans view their constitution as an embodiment of freedom itself. I've read great posts from both sides of the fence, and although I do not pretend to be versed in American history, I wish to put "my two cents" in as at were, from the viewpoint of a citizen of the world.

I live in Canada, probably one of the best countries to live in the world, or at least it was, but more importantly I live in the world. What happens in America affects me as does what happens in the Middle East, or Japan, or Europe. The economics of the world are so intertwined, it is inevitable.

The fact that a sniper is running loose in the US, killing at will is a testament to gun control. Oh yes, the same could be said if he were weilding a knife, but killing from a distance affords one a greater chance of escape. I'm sure Jack the Ripper would've been caught had he attempted to kill more. That however is not my point.

Gun control will never work period. It's a great idea on paper, just like communism is a great idea on paper, but is impossible to achieve given human nature. The problem, as I see it, in the argument of the US constitution, is that Americans, by your own admission, will never relinquish their firearms.

But I have to ask, why? Is it that you view it as a freedom being taken from you? But is it a freedom? Why is it a freedom, because it's written on a document that by owning a gun, you are free?

It was once accepted practice for well to do citizens to own African Americans as slaves, to be bought and traded, not unlike perhaps guns today. It was viewed as right then, but us completely unacceptable today. Why is it unacceptable today? Because one life is no more important than another. Because we are "more civilized now." Ask a slaver during the civil way if they were willing to give up their slave and you'd be given the same answer as if you asked a gun owner to hand over their weapon. No way.

So ask yourself, why is gun control such a bad thing? Does it really remove any of your freedoms? Perhaps you are responsible enough to own a gun, but what about your neighbor? Apparently the Washington Sniper isn't responsible enough to own a gun, but someone thought he was.

That same constitution that allows you own a gun, is also allowing the sniper to shoot whoever he sees fit. "Oh it could never happen to me," you say. I'm sure each of his victoms thought the same. Maybe his next victom will be your spouse, child or other loved one.

Gun control will never work, because people don't want it to work. I myself really have nothing against owning a gun. I do have a problem with people owning ammunition for said gun. If you like to collect guns, fine, no problem, but you sure don't need any bullets for a "collection."

Anyway, I feel I'm a little off topic here, and it's not intended to offend anyone, but once again, ask yourself: Do I REALLY need to own a gun? Is it going to improve my freedom to own one?[/QUOTE]The owning of slaves IS not and WAS not a RIGHT in the U.S. Constitution, it was allowed by the indivual States in their Laws or Constitutions, so it was a pratice nothing like the Right under the 2nd amendement to keep and bare arms. Due to a bad U.S. Supreme court decision (Dread Scott) Slavery was interpreted as being Constitutional, sort of.

Yes owning a gun improves my and my families freedom. By exerciseing the freedom and protecting the freedom, I am insuring the freedom is not taken away.

[Animal]

Originally posted by John D Harris:

The owning of slaves IS not and WAS not a RIGHT in the U.S. Constitution, it was allowed by the indivual States in their Laws or Constitutions, so it was a pratice nothing like the Right under the 2nd amendement to keep and bare arms. Due to a bad U.S. Supreme court decision (Dread Scott) Slavery was interpreted as being Constitutional, sort of.

Yes owning a gun improves my and my families freedom. By exerciseing the freedom and protecting the freedom, I am insuring the freedom is not taken away.[/QUOTE]

Explain to me again, WHY it's a freedom. Because someone told you it was?