The 2nd Amendment needs a amendment to clarify it.

Kids being killed by guns is as acceptable as even more kids being killed by cars. It's not acceptable but its a fact of life. There have been deadly accidents with pretty much everything you can imagine and a lot of things you can't imagine. The solution is not to elimate everything that could potentially kill, the solution is to educate people on how to use them properly.

 

The whole concept of comparing Children getting killed with guns with something that kills more kids To vindicate a Idea that the gun deaths are reasonable because there is less of them. Is simply stupid.

 

Dang straight you're having a hard time dealing with his massive intellectual brain...it shows every time you respond to him. Everyone here can tell and it's "like your" not like you.

 

Instead of ignoring someone making an ^%$ of you, try responding with some factual responses that support what you are saying. It's more than not more then, eh?

 

Dude you can put your hands down already. Haven't I already accepted your surrender twice?

 

UC Davis Violence Prevention Research Program.

Entitled "Inside Gun Shows: What Goes on When Everybody Thinks Nobody’s Watching," the comprehensive, 300-page report provides a “you are there” exposure to the issue based on direct observations made at 78 gun shows in 19 states, most of them between 2005 and 2008.

The report features hundreds of photographs and some video that show:

illegal straw purchases, whereby a surrogate buys from a licensed retailer on behalf of another
anonymous, undocumented private-party gun sales
widespread availability of assault weapons, .50-caliber rifles and the parts needed to make untraceable guns
links between gun shows and the neo-Confederacy movement and neo-Nazism

 

Admit it Gun Heroes tell us how many of you have shot yourself in the foot. Lots of people do--What we do know is that in 2011, there were 14,675 unintentional, non-fatal firearms injuries in the US. Some percentage of these are self-inflicted.

This includes both people who accidently shoot themselves, and people who accidently shoot someone else.
Step up admit it, are you one of those 14,675 for that one year.

 

People with access to more guns tend to kill more people—with guns. States with higher gun ownership rates have higher gun murder rates—as much as 114 percent higher than states with lower gun ownership rates.
• A recent study looking at 30 years of homicide data found that for every one percent increase in a state's gun ownership rate, there is a nearly one percent increase in its firearm homicide rate.
• Gun death rates are generally lower in states with restrictions such as safe-storage requirements or assault-weapons bans.
Now this isn't what gun heroes our telling us is it???

 

• Nine percent of Americans report signs of "impulsive angry behavior" (such as breaking things and getting into fights)—and say they own a gun.



• Drivers who carry guns are 44 percent more likely than unarmed drivers to make obscene gestures at other motorists, and 77 percent more likely to follow them aggressively.
• Among Texans convicted of serious crimes, those with concealed-handgun licenses were sentenced for threatening someone with a firearm 4.8 times more than those without.
• In states with Stand Your Ground and other laws making it easier to shoot in self-defense, those policies have been linked to a 7 to 10 percent increase in homicides

 

Gun violence cost 229 billion a year, Much of it paid by me and My neighbors when gun heroes shoot them self in the foot. Maybe a health tax should be added or mandatory insurance for gun ownership. Just to pay for the part that the public has to pay a year to pay for someone else's (*)(*)(*)(*). This group are notorious for sucking at the government trough but that has to stop.

 

This one is all telling Mass shootings stopped by armed civilians in the past 33 years: 0
• Chances that a shooting in a hospital emergency department involves guns taken from guards: 1 in 5

- - - Updated - - -

They say that Guns protect them, Owning a gun has been linked to higher risks of homicide, suicide, and accidental death by gun.
• For every time a gun is used in self-defense in the home, there are 7 assaults or murders, 11 suicide attempts, and 4 accidents involving guns in or around a home.
• 43 percent of homes with guns and kids have at least one unlocked firearm.
• In one experiment, one third of 8-to-12-year-old boys who fou

 

Gee I'm sorry if I missed one of your important comments. Maybe it's because you aren't saying anything Big guy.

- - - Updated - - -

Didn't surrender if you have something to contribute fine otherwise you don't exist, sorry hero!

- - - Updated - - -

This one I'm totally sure of just by the responses I see here ---In 2014, according to FBI data, nearly eight times more people were shot and killed in arguments than by civilians trying to stop a crime.
• In one survey, nearly 1 percent of Americans reported using guns to defend themselves or their property. However, a closer look at these claims found that more than half involved using guns in an aggressive manner, such as escalating an argument.
• A study in Philadelphia found that the odds of an assault victim being shot were 4.5 times greater if he carried a gun. His odds of being killed were 4.2 times greater.

 

actually that is a dishonest claim-one of the reasons is when an armed citizen stops a nut case before the nut case kills at least 4 people its not listed as a mass shooting.

its like saying a vaccine has never stopped an epidemic because not enough people became sick enough to qualify

the nonsense you post is nothing more than dishonest propaganda.

if you are so afraid of guns, then don't own one

if you are so hateful of how gun owners vote, stop pretending that your jihad against lawful gun ownership is motivated by public safety

 

You only see what you want eh?
http://www.frontpagemag.com/point/1...-gun-stopped-school-shooter-daniel-greenfield

 

You can cut jbander's desperation with a knife.

Bye bye left wing, PC, freedom hating traitors to your country.

 

Your right, Jbander. I’ve got nothing to contribute to help you on the collective right theory. Here is what I have found so far in support of the collective right interpretation:

I have searched and there is not one single founding father who said he believed the RKBA was a collective right limited to possession of militia arms while in service to the state. In fact, those that address the question say it is an individual right.

I have searched and found nothing in the history of the ratification of the Constitution or the BoR which says or supports the collective right interpretation. In fact the history says otherwise.

I have compared the language of the 2nd Amendment with the language of other contemporaneous amendments, and I can find no support for the collective right interpretation. In fact the opposite is true.

I have studied the end of slavery, and the creation of the 14th Amendment, and find no support for the collective right here either. In fact, the opposite is true.

I have read the entire Constitution, and have found that the collective right interpretation places the 2nd Amendment in direct conflict with other portions of the Constitution—while the individual right interpretation (the plain meaning reading of the language itself) does not.

I have searched the entire history of the Unites States Supreme Court, and there is not one single case that holds the 2nd Amendment is a collective right. In fact, the cases often misrepresented for this position offer zero support for the collective right interpretation.

In fact, the only support I can find for the collective right interpretation comes from the opinions of a minority of modern day writers. But their arguments—always goal driven and occasionally even passionate—are simply not supported by any history or cases.

In the end, my search has revealed just as much support for the collective right interpretation as yours has:

Absolutely nothing.

It makes me wonder how an interpretation can be taken seriously by anyone when its supporters cannot cite any historical or case evidence in support of it….

 

Oh m, I think you should be checked in with first on all decisions by the Supreme court. Especially the sitting courts that did make their decision on the premise of collective rights. Gee when they made their decision if they would have had you for reference, they could have not even worried about it and simply do it your way. You people are such a clown act,m your unbelievable , considering I have never even supported collective rights.
personally. The interpretation of the second could change completely overnight with simply a reinterpretation of one word in the 2nd just like every amendment.

 

I would love to see a specific ruling that supports this.

 

So if we switch around and say guns are worse because they kill less then its not silly?

 

Better dig a little deeper , corporations became people and if that can happen anything can happen.

- - - Updated - - -

What the hell does this mean?????

 

Well DUH! Of course there wouldn't be many mass shootings stopped by an armed citizen. Because the definition of a mass shooting is three or more people dying and that happens at gun free zones. It's like saying no bear attacks were stopped by mace when mace wasn't allowed in the first place. And actually your wrong. Citizens with rifles helped take out the sniper in the Texan tower. As for the second again, DUH! Cops get shot with their own guns as well. And do you know why? It's because they are open carrying and its expected for them to be carrying in the first place.

- - - Updated - - -

Source?

- - - Updated - - -

What did you meant when I quoted you?

 

So your man took him out in the Texas tower, as my comment says. How about Macoy and Martinez. So maybe I'm not wrong, or am I wrong just because I don't agree with you. As usually the truth isn't enough so it's just so easy to lie right. The people who were hiding said that the other shooters ,the people that pulled out guns and started shooting confused them and they didn't know where to hide. So I wonder how many people died hiding on the wrong side of a barrier because of your gun heroes.

 

You must be kidding, This is how much of the regressive parties money comes from ,Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission

 

I would keep this simple amend it to be limited only to a militia and the wording clearly a state run militia as per the US Constitutional standards for them. Wording such as ...

The militia is to be considered as run by an individual State as per Constitutional specifications under the delegated powers and therefore will be deemed in those cases alone well regulated. The ownership of private firearms will be at the discretion under Congress to make laws and the appropriate government agencies regulations and shall be removed from the hands of the States except in the creation of militias including the arming and maintaining of them, except when called up during a declared state of war at the request of the President.

 

I'd love to hear how the Bill of Rights plays into this.