Log In

Your email is not your username

Register

If you were a member of the old Bodybuilding.com forums and would like to reuse your previous username, you can request it below. We use your email only for registration and do not store it. For more information, please see our Privacy Policy.

Confirm your email

A registration code was sent to your email. Enter it here.

Welcome

You have successfully setup your account.

Sign in

Quick Navigation Bottom Misc
Forum » ** Official Florida Shooting Endless Argument Thread **
  1. Results 1651 to 1680 of 1820
  2. Page 56 of 61
  3. First
  5. 54
  6. 55
  7. 56
  8. 57
  9. 58
  11. Last

Thread: ** Official Florida Shooting Endless Argument Thread **

post 1544024931 02-16-2018, 02:09 PM
-
#1651
  1. Farley1324
  2. I can do this all day
  1. Farley1324
  2. I can do this all day
  3. Join Date: Mar 2008
  4. Location: Cumming, Georgia, United States
  5. Posts: 151,489
  6. Rep Power: 564644
Originally Posted By dhawkeye1980⏩
Again what stricter gun regulations would stop mass shootings? You love using catch phrases like "stricter background check" but you have no clue what is involved in a current background check or even an idea on how to make it "stricter"
Sure he does. Too many noise complaints. If your dog barks too long too often, you get your guns taken away because of too many police calls to your house, even if you're 13 at the time, you then forfeit your Right to have a gun as an adult
post 1544024981 02-16-2018, 02:10 PM
-
#1652
  1. nm1891
  2. Registered User
  1. nm1891
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Apr 2012
  4. Posts: 9,078
  5. Rep Power: 28909
Originally Posted By xxmrbeastxx⏩
I think that’s part of the problem that we are afraid to update or a revise a document written over 200 years ago. We still hold onto the idea that owning a gun is a fundamental right. And frankly it shouldn’t be.
The Constitution can be ammended but it is a difficult proccess, as the founders intended it to be. And that is completely your opinion. We were founded on personal freedoms which inherently means giving up some collective security. There are plenty of other countries that you can move to if security, collectivism, and more government is what you are looking for.
S/B/D—185/165/205 (sumo w/ straps)
post 1544025021 02-16-2018, 02:10 PM
-
#1653
  1. Caeculus
  2. Banned
  1. Caeculus
  2. Banned
  3. Join Date: Mar 2017
  4. Posts: 8,428
  5. Rep Power: 0
post 1544025161 02-16-2018, 02:11 PM
-
#1654
  1. Future24
  2. Future Covers
  1. Future24
  2. Future Covers
  3. Join Date: Jul 2008
  4. Posts: 36,576
  5. Rep Power: 126691
Originally Posted By SpeedCheeser⏩
The previous poster wants police visits added to background checks. No charges filed, no convictions, no due process of law.

And yes, wanting infringements to the right to keep and bear arms IS anti 2A.
It would not be a blanket rejection for simple police visits. It would require a stricter investigation at that point. Again, everyone on both sides is so "all or nothing." That is the problem. There is a middle ground and extra steps that can be taken. More investigations, interviews, etc. Here is an example Aussies used:

Australia has 28-day waiting periods, thorough background checks, and a requirement to present a "justifiable reason" to own a gun. Self defense is not a justifiable reason. Does the 2nd Amendment say you have a right to own a gun for self defense or to preserve the security of a Free State? I already know your response so no need for answer. That comes down to interpretation and everyone has their own. However, I think the self-defense justification can be better developed. Is anyone really buying an AR 15 for self-defense? I am not sure, so maybe you gun guys can give me insight.
Last year I spent more money on spilled liquor in bars than 99% of miscers make in a year.
post 1544025351 02-16-2018, 02:13 PM
-
#1655
  1. Future24
  2. Future Covers
  1. Future24
  2. Future Covers
  3. Join Date: Jul 2008
  4. Posts: 36,576
  5. Rep Power: 126691
Originally Posted By Farley1324⏩
Sure he does. Too many noise complaints. If your dog barks too long too often, you get your guns taken away because of too many police calls to your house, even if you're 13 at the time, you then forfeit your Right to have a gun as an adult
Your problem is you take the extreme positions. That is why these discussions with you are pointless. Every example you use is extreme. Clearly, this would lead to an investigation as to why the police was called, and move on from there. It would not be a simple blanket ban for it. Relax. No one is taking your guns.
Last year I spent more money on spilled liquor in bars than 99% of miscers make in a year.
post 1544025461 02-16-2018, 02:14 PM
-
#1656
  1. DrewDarden
  1. DrewDarden
  3. Join Date: Nov 2016
  4. Posts: 23,046
  5. Subscribers: 5
  6. Rep Power: 510012
Originally Posted By seanb1979⏩
This isn't Norway lol. Gourmet food in a supermax?
Have you ever watched any of the prison documentaries like Lockup?

They get all that stuff he listed (the cable TV etc.) in every prison I've ever seen highlighted. I wouldn't call their food gourmet, but it's basically like high school cafeteria food and they have access to a store where they can buy unlimited candy, honey buns, donuts, coke, etc.

It's not the bread and water lockdown it's advertised to be.
Misc Lifting Crew (Team Lead)
post 1544025521 02-16-2018, 02:14 PM
-
#1657
  1. Farley1324
  2. I can do this all day
  1. Farley1324
  2. I can do this all day
  3. Join Date: Mar 2008
  4. Location: Cumming, Georgia, United States
  5. Posts: 151,489
  6. Rep Power: 564644
Originally Posted By Future24⏩
It would not be a blanket rejection for simple police visits. It would require a stricter investigation at that point.
At what point?
Originally Posted By Future24⏩
Again, everyone on both sides is so "all or nothing." That is the problem. There is a middle ground and extra steps that can be taken. More investigations, interviews, etc. Here is an example Aussies used:

Australia has 28-day waiting periods, thorough background checks, and a requirement to present a "justifiable reason" to own a gun. Self defense is not a justifiable reason. Does the 2nd Amendment say you have a right to own a gun for self defense or to preserve the security of a Free State? I already know your response so no need for answer. That comes down to interpretation and everyone has their own. However, I think the self-defense justification can be better developed. Is anyone really buying an AR 15 for self-defense? I am not sure, so maybe you gun guys can give me insight.
The problem is you keep parroting these cute little phrases without any idea what they mean, what you mean, or how they could be implemented. You have literally zero substance to what you profess to think. You probably aren't even thinking, but just repeating the little phrases you hear other people say (or read other people type).

We DAF about Aus land and we aren't about to say self defense is not a reason to own a gun nor are we going to say you have to have a "Justifiable reason" to exercise a RIGHT.


Now, will you either explain what it is you think you mean about this "too many police calls mean you can't have a gun" or stop parroting that meaningless phrase?
post 1544025601 02-16-2018, 02:15 PM
-
#1658
  1. Farley1324
  2. I can do this all day
  1. Farley1324
  2. I can do this all day
  3. Join Date: Mar 2008
  4. Location: Cumming, Georgia, United States
  5. Posts: 151,489
  6. Rep Power: 564644
Originally Posted By Future24⏩
Your problem is you take the extreme positions. That is why these discussions with you are pointless. Every example you use is extreme. Clearly, this would lead to an investigation as to why the police was called, and move on from there. It would not be a simple blanket ban for it. Relax. No one is taking your guns.
There is no discussion, because you don't understand the subject material and continue to say things that are literally meaningless.

Now, will you either explain what it is you think you mean about this "too many police calls mean you can't have a gun" or stop parroting that meaningless phrase?
post 1544025971 02-16-2018, 02:19 PM
-
#1659
  1. Future24
  2. Future Covers
  1. Future24
  2. Future Covers
  3. Join Date: Jul 2008
  4. Posts: 36,576
  5. Rep Power: 126691
Originally Posted By Farley1324⏩
At what point?



The problem is you keep parroting these cute little phrases without any idea what they mean, what you mean, or how they could be implemented. You have literally zero substance to what you profess to think. You probably aren't even thinking, but just repeating the little phrases you hear other people say (or read other people type).

We DAF about Aus land and we aren't about to say self defense is not a reason to own a gun nor are we going to say you have to have a "Justifiable reason" to exercise a RIGHT.


Now, will you either explain what it is you think you mean about this "too many police calls mean you can't have a gun" or stop parroting that meaningless phrase?
Originally Posted By Farley1324⏩
There is no discussion, because you don't understand the subject material and continue to say things that are literally meaningless.

Now, will you either explain what it is you think you mean about this "too many police calls mean you can't have a gun" or stop parroting that meaningless phrase?
Where did I say "too many police calls mean you can't have a gun"? Generally curious. Seems like you are reading what I say and putting your extreme spin on it.
Last year I spent more money on spilled liquor in bars than 99% of miscers make in a year.
post 1544026021 02-16-2018, 02:19 PM
-
#1660
  1. dhawkeye1980
  2. Banned
  1. dhawkeye1980
  2. Banned
  3. Join Date: Apr 2012
  4. Posts: 33,168
  5. Rep Power: 0
Originally Posted By Future24⏩
It would not be a blanket rejection for simple police visits. It would require a stricter investigation at that point. Again, everyone on both sides is so "all or nothing." That is the problem. There is a middle ground and extra steps that can be taken. More investigations, interviews, etc. Here is an example Aussies used:

Australia has 28-day waiting periods, thorough background checks, and a requirement to present a "justifiable reason" to own a gun. Self defense is not a justifiable reason. Does the 2nd Amendment say you have a right to own a gun for self defense or to preserve the security of a Free State? I already know your response so no need for answer. That comes down to interpretation and everyone has their own. However, I think the self-defense justification can be better developed. Is anyone really buying an AR 15 for self-defense? I am not sure, so maybe you gun guys can give me insight.
What does "shall not be infringed" mean to you

The supreme court has ruled the 2A applies to self defense DC v Heller

Stop comparing cuckstralia to the US.

Do you know how much more money it would cost to do what you are saying. 10m firearms are roughly sold every month in the US...
post 1544026061 02-16-2018, 02:19 PM
-
#1661
  1. Future24
  2. Future Covers
  1. Future24
  2. Future Covers
  3. Join Date: Jul 2008
  4. Posts: 36,576
  5. Rep Power: 126691
Originally Posted By Farley1324⏩
At what point?



The problem is you keep parroting these cute little phrases without any idea what they mean, what you mean, or how they could be implemented. You have literally zero substance to what you profess to think. You probably aren't even thinking, but just repeating the little phrases you hear other people say (or read other people type).

We DAF about Aus land and we aren't about to say self defense is not a reason to own a gun nor are we going to say you have to have a "Justifiable reason" to exercise a RIGHT.


Now, will you either explain what it is you think you mean about this "too many police calls mean you can't have a gun" or stop parroting that meaningless phrase?
Well you don't have the absolute right to own a gun actually. Hence why you cannot buy an automatic weapon.
Last year I spent more money on spilled liquor in bars than 99% of miscers make in a year.
post 1544026201 02-16-2018, 02:21 PM
-
#1662
  1. Meatie
  2. 6 scoops
  1. Meatie
  2. 6 scoops
  3. Join Date: Oct 2009
  4. Age: 37
  5. Posts: 16,732
  6. Rep Power: 208258
Originally Posted By dhawkeye1980⏩
What does "shall not be infringed" mean to you
...
I can only assume that he's one of those guys that thinks the constitution is a "living, breathing, document"

6 scoops of xf up2.0 a day
post 1544026221 02-16-2018, 02:21 PM
-
#1663
  1. HughBMyron
  2. Registered User
  1. HughBMyron
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Mar 2014
  4. Age: 38
  5. Posts: 8,058
  6. Rep Power: 27987
56 pages and Farley still hasn't come up with even a debatable solution for an obvious problem.
"Steven Curry is a mouth guard chewing piece of chit" - Gandhi
post 1544026301 02-16-2018, 02:22 PM
-
#1664
  1. Future24
  2. Future Covers
  1. Future24
  2. Future Covers
  3. Join Date: Jul 2008
  4. Posts: 36,576
  5. Rep Power: 126691
Originally Posted By dhawkeye1980⏩
What does "shall not be infringed" mean to you

The supreme court has ruled the 2A applies to self defense DC v Heller

Stop comparing cuckstralia to the US.

Do you know how much more money it would cost to do what you are saying. 10m firearms are roughly sold every month in the US...
Actually glad you brought that up because the Supreme Court also took an interested approach to the "militia" aspect that wasn't supposed to be infringed.

Last year I spent more money on spilled liquor in bars than 99% of miscers make in a year.
post 1544026601 02-16-2018, 02:24 PM
-
#1665
  1. Reformed146
  2. Cutting in 2018
  1. Reformed146
  2. Cutting in 2018
  3. Join Date: Nov 2011
  4. Posts: 261
  5. Rep Power: 1087
Originally Posted By Reformed146⏩
I'll probably get negged again for this, but so far my pretty mild contributions have only been negged from one side, also making it seem less like that side has a point.
Sure enough, that got negged. Is anyone actually trying to convince anyone itt?
post 1544026681 02-16-2018, 02:24 PM
-
#1666
  1. dhawkeye1980
  2. Banned
  1. dhawkeye1980
  2. Banned
  3. Join Date: Apr 2012
  4. Posts: 33,168
  5. Rep Power: 0
Originally Posted By Future24⏩
Actually glad you brought that up because the Supreme Court also took an interested approach to the "militia" aspect that wasn't supposed to be infringed.

You wanna cite an actual source there instead of irrelevant graph?

Again what does shall not be infringed mean to you

Simple question
post 1544026691 02-16-2018, 02:24 PM
-
#1667
  1. Farley1324
  2. I can do this all day
  1. Farley1324
  2. I can do this all day
  3. Join Date: Mar 2008
  4. Location: Cumming, Georgia, United States
  5. Posts: 151,489
  6. Rep Power: 564644
Originally Posted By Future24⏩
Where did I say "too many police calls mean you can't have a gun"? Generally curious.
Right here
Originally Posted By Farley1324⏩
What about his background should have shown up on a background check??
Originally Posted By Future24⏩
Expelled from school, multiple police calls against him. That would be a good start.
Feel free to explain what any of this is supposed to mean anytime


So, do you think being expelled from school means you lose your Right to keep and bear arms?

Or do you think two noise complaints means you lose your right?

Because that's what you're saying.
post 1544026791 02-16-2018, 02:26 PM
-
#1668
  1. dhawkeye1980
  2. Banned
  1. dhawkeye1980
  2. Banned
  3. Join Date: Apr 2012
  4. Posts: 33,168
  5. Rep Power: 0
Originally Posted By HughBMyron⏩
56 pages and Farley still hasn't come up with even a debatable solution for an obvious problem.
Still waiting on you guys to post up what "stricter" gun laws you think would stop evil that doesnt infring on the 2, 4th or 5th amendment
post 1544026891 02-16-2018, 02:27 PM
-
#1669
  1. Future24
  2. Future Covers
  1. Future24
  2. Future Covers
  3. Join Date: Jul 2008
  4. Posts: 36,576
  5. Rep Power: 126691
Originally Posted By Meatie⏩
I can only assume that he's one of those guys that thinks the constitution is a "living, breathing, document"

I can only assume you do not know what that actually means. Otherwise, its good to know you are anti civil rights and liberties. I suggest you read Thurgood Marshall's opinion on the matter.
Last year I spent more money on spilled liquor in bars than 99% of miscers make in a year.
post 1544026931 02-16-2018, 02:27 PM
-
#1670
  1. Farley1324
  2. I can do this all day
  1. Farley1324
  2. I can do this all day
  3. Join Date: Mar 2008
  4. Location: Cumming, Georgia, United States
  5. Posts: 151,489
  6. Rep Power: 564644
Originally Posted By HughBMyron⏩
I'm willing to bet my gun cabinet is worth more than yours.
Post it

Fork pic.
Originally Posted By dhawkeye1980⏩
Still waiting on you guys to post up what "stricter" gun laws you think would stop evil that doesnt infring on the 2, 4th or 5th amendment
Surely...he will deliver?

nah probably talk about fantasy football some more
post 1544027011 02-16-2018, 02:28 PM
-
#1671
  1. dhawkeye1980
  2. Banned
  1. dhawkeye1980
  2. Banned
  3. Join Date: Apr 2012
  4. Posts: 33,168
  5. Rep Power: 0
Originally Posted By Future24⏩
I can only assume you do not know what that actually means. Otherwise, its good to know you are anti civil rights and liberties. I suggest you read Thurgood Marshall's opinion on the matter.
You should read scalias
post 1544027021 02-16-2018, 02:28 PM
-
#1672
  1. Future24
  2. Future Covers
  1. Future24
  2. Future Covers
  3. Join Date: Jul 2008
  4. Posts: 36,576
  5. Rep Power: 126691
Originally Posted By Farley1324⏩
Right here






Feel free to explain what any of this is supposed to mean anytime


So, do you think being expelled from school means you lose your Right to keep and bear arms?

Or do you think two noise complaints means you lose your right?

Because that's what you're saying.
Ah now you are jumping to conclusions. Simply showing up on a report does not mean automatic failure to obtain a weapon. As I have stated multiple times, it would require a stricter, more comprehensive investigation. As I said, it is a good start. Instead, you jump to "1 noise compliant = no guns." Poor form.
Last year I spent more money on spilled liquor in bars than 99% of miscers make in a year.
post 1544027231 02-16-2018, 02:29 PM
-
#1673
  1. Farley1324
  2. I can do this all day
  1. Farley1324
  2. I can do this all day
  3. Join Date: Mar 2008
  4. Location: Cumming, Georgia, United States
  5. Posts: 151,489
  6. Rep Power: 564644
Originally Posted By Future24⏩
As I have stated multiple times, it would require a stricter, more comprehensive investigation.
Which is all you say. They are empty words with no meaning that you are completely incapable of explaining.
post 1544027411 02-16-2018, 02:31 PM
-
#1674
  1. HughBMyron
  2. Registered User
  1. HughBMyron
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Mar 2014
  4. Age: 38
  5. Posts: 8,058
  6. Rep Power: 27987
Originally Posted By dhawkeye1980⏩
Still waiting on you guys to post up what "stricter" gun laws you think would stop evil that doesnt infring on the 2, 4th or 5th amendment
I posted a detailed solution several pages back. Adopt a system similar to Canada's with more freedom of restricted rifle carrying.
"Steven Curry is a mouth guard chewing piece of chit" - Gandhi
post 1544027701 02-16-2018, 02:34 PM
-
#1675
  1. SpeedCheeser
  2. 4doorsmorewhores
  1. SpeedCheeser
  2. 4doorsmorewhores
  3. Join Date: Apr 2010
  4. Location: Texas, United States
  5. Posts: 15,626
  6. Rep Power: 147987
Originally Posted By Future24⏩
It would not be a blanket rejection for simple police visits. It would require a stricter investigation at that point. Again, everyone on both sides is so "all or nothing." That is the problem. There is a middle ground and extra steps that can be taken. More investigations, interviews, etc.
It doesn't matter how many additional investigations or interviews you go through. If you haven't been convicted of any wrong doing or been deemed mentally unfit to control your own affairs, any restriction of your rights would be a violation of due process.
Here is an example Aussies used:

Australia has 28-day waiting periods, thorough background checks, and a requirement to present a "justifiable reason" to own a gun. Self defense is not a justifiable reason.
Quite frankly, I'm not interested in what Oz did. But the idea that wanting an adequate means of self defense for an extreme potential circumstance is not a justifiable reason to own a firearm is insane to me.
Does the 2nd Amendment say you have a right to own a gun for self defense or to preserve the security of a Free State? I already know your response so no need for answer. That comes down to interpretation and everyone has their own.
It's pretty hard to interpret that "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed" as anything but exactly what is stated.
However, I think the self-defense justification can be better developed. Is anyone really buying an AR 15 for self-defense? I am not sure, so maybe you gun guys can give me insight.
Yes. Many if not most people who own many different firearms will default to an AR 15 style gun as their primary home defense weapon.
Misc Firearms Crew

Official Supp. Misc Beer Crew

RIP YGST
post 1544027731 02-16-2018, 02:34 PM
-
#1676
  1. Farley1324
  2. I can do this all day
  1. Farley1324
  2. I can do this all day
  3. Join Date: Mar 2008
  4. Location: Cumming, Georgia, United States
  5. Posts: 151,489
  6. Rep Power: 564644
Originally Posted By HughBMyron⏩
Obviously you can't have a government agent interview everyone. Same as its unrealistic for the FBI to monitor every loner in every high school.

Something along the lines of a licensing system. Take a test and/or course. Pass test. Submit application with references. Wait a month or two and receive your license to purchase firearms.

This would weed out a lot of goofballs.
Illinois residents must be licensed, yes, the person themselves must be licensed, to so much as buy or possess a single round of ammunition, let alone a gun.

Ask Chicago how well that works.
post 1544027801 02-16-2018, 02:34 PM
-
#1677
  1. SpeedCheeser
  2. 4doorsmorewhores
  1. SpeedCheeser
  2. 4doorsmorewhores
  3. Join Date: Apr 2010
  4. Location: Texas, United States
  5. Posts: 15,626
  6. Rep Power: 147987
Originally Posted By HughBMyron⏩
more freedom... restricted
I'm sorry...wut?
Misc Firearms Crew

Official Supp. Misc Beer Crew

RIP YGST
post 1544027811 02-16-2018, 02:35 PM
-
#1678
  1. Farley1324
  2. I can do this all day
  1. Farley1324
  2. I can do this all day
  3. Join Date: Mar 2008
  4. Location: Cumming, Georgia, United States
  5. Posts: 151,489
  6. Rep Power: 564644
Originally Posted By HughBMyron⏩
I'm willing to bet my gun cabinet is worth more than yours.
Post it

Fork pic.
post 1544027821 02-16-2018, 02:35 PM
-
#1679
  1. dhawkeye1980
  2. Banned
  1. dhawkeye1980
  2. Banned
  3. Join Date: Apr 2012
  4. Posts: 33,168
  5. Rep Power: 0
Originally Posted By HughBMyron⏩
I posted a detailed solution several pages back. Adopt a system similar to Canada's with more freedom of restricted rifle carrying.
I asked you what will not infringe on the 2nd, 4th and 5th amendment for law abiding citizens

You failed to deliver that
post 1544028001 02-16-2018, 02:36 PM
-
#1680
  1. Future24
  2. Future Covers
  1. Future24
  2. Future Covers
  3. Join Date: Jul 2008
  4. Posts: 36,576
  5. Rep Power: 126691
Originally Posted By dhawkeye1980⏩
You should read scalias
You know what. You are right. We should take Scalia's view on this:

"The Constitution is not a living organism; it is a legal document. It says something and doesn't say other things."

Where does it say you can own a gun for self-defense in there?
Last year I spent more money on spilled liquor in bars than 99% of miscers make in a year.
Quick Navigation Top Misc
Bookmarks
Digg.com
Digg
del.icio.us
del.icio.us
Stumbleupon.com
StumbleUpon
Google.com
Google
Facebook.com
Facebook
Posting Permissions
  1. You may not post new threads
  2. You may not post replies
  3. You may not post attachments
  4. You may not edit your posts