Online Now 3185

The Blue Board

We aren't just committed to college football; we're early enrolling in it.

On this Board 2377
Record: 7394 (2/14/2012)

Online now 3994
Record: 18710 (2/25/2012)

Boards ▾

The Blue Board

We aren't just committed to college football; we're early enrolling in it.

247Rumors

College football scuttlebutt and scoop- powered by Football Rumor Mill

The Green Board

Where the madness isn't just in March.

Big Ten Board (Beta)

Reply

Don't mess with Texas and our guns

  • 92DT said...

    When you say you "carry," what do you mean? Like, when you're in the grocery story, you have a gun on you? When you're in the mall, you have your gun with you? That just seems so Tombstone-ish to me. And I love guns.

    I carry ~80% of the time regardless of where I am. Mall, store, etc.

    It's tombstone-ish to carry in the mall, yet there was a shooting at one what, a month ago?

    It's not like I am open carrying on my hip. You'd never know I was carrying. Not a chance.

    Marshall Nole

  • USMCAG said...

    No it's not, it has been done. Go do some research.

    Please, enlighten me. How many mass shootings in the last 10 years have been stopped by another citizen with a gun?

    signature image signature image signature image

    CMXI

  • USMCAG said...

    No it's not, it has been done. Go do some research.

    Says the guy that knows nothing about the second amendment or the Supreme Court's ruling on it. They're coming for your guns! Better go buy more.

    signature image

    !!!

    Grand Slam

  • RyGuy35 said...

    Have better aim.

    She hit him nearly every shot, her aim was pretty damn good.

    This post was edited by CTAG on 1/16/2013 at 12:52 PM

    signature image signature image signature image

    CTAG

  • YOLO27405 said...

    She hit him nearly every shot, her aim was pretty damn good.

    Eh, she could have had headshots. shrug

    signature image signature image signature image

    CMXI

  • CMXI said...

    Yes. What's up?

    OK ... so I have two questions ... I personally have no problem with banning assault rifles. But are they not, in fact, protected by the Constitution? The 2nd amendment doesn't really distinguish what "arms" are/is, does it?

    signature image signature image signature image

    92DT

  • Woman hiding with kids shoots intruder | www.wsbtv.com

    A woman hiding in her attic with children shot an intruder multiple times before fleeing to safety Friday.

    www.wsbtv.com
    signature image signature image signature image

    92DT

  • CMXI said...

    Please, enlighten me. How many mass shootings in the last 10 years have been stopped by another citizen with a gun?

    Jesus this is a stupid question.

    Perhaps the reason a shooting never escalated to a "mass shooting" was because there was somebody there with a gun?

    signature image signature image

    Status

  • Status said...

    Jesus this is a stupid question.

    Perhaps the reason a shooting never escalated to a "mass shooting" was because there was somebody there with a gun?

    Oh yeah. Haha. Damn lame stream media and police departments all over the country just don't report those happenings.

    signature image

    !!!

    Grand Slam

  • Status said...

    Jesus this is a stupid question.

    Perhaps the reason a shooting never escalated to a "mass shooting" was because there was somebody there with a gun?

    Can you provide me with any evidence of a situation like that? We can assume that a "mass shooting" would have been something where a person indiscriminately opens fire in an area with multiple people with no connection to the shooter. Any incidents that you can show me where someone opened fire in such a situation but was stopped before they actually killed multiple people?

    signature image signature image signature image

    CMXI

  • 92DT said...

    OK ... so I have two questions ... I personally have no problem with banning assault rifles. But are they not, in fact, protected by the Constitution? The 2nd amendment doesn't really distinguish what "arms" are/is, does it?

    Here's an excerpt from DC v. Heller, the recent Supreme Court decision, written by Justice Scalia (an avid firearm enthusiast and 2nd amendment fan) that dramatically expanded gun rights:

    "Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose: For example, concealed weapons prohibitions have been upheld under the Amendment or state analogues. The Court’s opinion should not be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms."

    The decision was vague about what types of gun control is permissible and left open the question of whether "military style" weapons such as M-16s are protected under the 2nd Amendment. The types of weapons covered under the amendment are what the Supreme court called "have some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia" and/or are "in common usage."

    Vague indeed. This case upended over a century of law, and left a lot of stuff open to interpretation.

    This post was edited by Final Countdown on 1/16/2013 at 1:03 PM

    Final Countdown

  • 92DT said...

    OK ... so I have two questions ... I personally have no problem with banning assault rifles. But are they not, in fact, protected by the Constitution? The 2nd amendment doesn't really distinguish what "arms" are/is, does it?

    I'm replying to this so you don't think I'm ducking your question. I have a meeting at 1:30, and since I'm not a constitutional scholar, I can't just rattle off an answer to your question. I'll get back to you later today/tonight on this.

    EDIT: and I'm on central time, so that meeting's in half an hour, but I'll get back to you later.

    This post was edited by CMXI on 1/16/2013 at 1:02 PM

    signature image signature image signature image

    CMXI

  • 92DT said...

    OK ... so I have two questions ... I personally have no problem with banning assault rifles. But are they not, in fact, protected by the Constitution? The 2nd amendment doesn't really distinguish what "arms" are/is, does it?

    Google Washington DC vs. Heller. They absolutely can be restricted.

    signature image

    !!!

    Grand Slam

  • lolz at people acting like they won't let them take their guns like they are tough shit. If the government shows up at the door will you really fight them to keep your guns? No you won't. If you do you will be in prison and will still lose your guns, or you will be dead. If you're not mentally retarded you would understand the situation when it really happens.

    This post has been edited 3 times, most recently by wutang148713 on 1/16/2013 at 1:03 PM

    signature image signature image

    wutang148713 ●

  • CMXI said...

    Can you provide me with any evidence of a situation like that? We can assume that a "mass shooting" would have been something where a person indiscriminately opens fire in an area with multiple people with no connection to the shooter. Any incidents that you can show me where someone opened fire in such a situation but was stopped before they actually killed multiple people?

    Shooting in the Oregon mall a couple months ago. Kid came out with his gun and started shooting. A guy with a concealed pulled his out, kid sees it, kid goes in the back and shoots himself.

    Story overhsadowed by sandy hook.

    signature image signature image

    Status

  • wutang148713 said...

    lolz at people acting like they won't let them take their guns like they are tough shit. If the government shows up at the door will you really fight them to keep your guns? No you won't. If you do you will be in prison and will still lose your guns, or you will be dead. If you're not mentally retarded you would understand the situation when it really happens.

    Oh geez. What is exactly so hard about somebody saying "well I lost it out hunting?"

    What do the cops do then Einstein?

    signature image signature image

    Status

  • Grand Slam said...

    Google Washington DC vs. Heller. They absolutely can be restricted.

    Reading Final Countdown's post above ... I'm not sure I would read that as they can "absolutely be restricted."

    signature image signature image signature image

    92DT

  • wutang148713 said...

    lolz at people acting like they won't let them take their guns like they are tough shit. If the government shows up at the door will you really fight them to keep your guns? No you won't. If you do you will be in prison and will still lose your guns, or you will be dead. If you're not mentally retarded you would understand the situation when it really happens.

    It will never happen.

    Not even the government is stupid enough to send some lame ass LEO or government employee to confiscate. There WOULD be shootouts here and there.

    No, the most they will ever do is implement a buyback. In which case, most of us gun owners simply wouldn't go sell our guns. We would just hang on to them and keep them in our house.

    Marshall Nole

  • 92DT said...

    Reading Final Countdown's post above ... I'm not sure I would read that as they can "absolutely be restricted."

    Grand Slam doesn't know what he's talking about and is just a radical left winger on this issue.

    You can clearly see from Scalia's own words that it is vague and makes it hard to interpret one way or another.

    Marshall Nole

  • "Sir I'm here to confiscate your weapons. "

    "Somebody broke into my house and stole them."

    "Sorry to hear that. Have a nice day sir."

    lol liberal morons

    signature image signature image

    Status

  • Marshall Nole said...

    I love the state of Texas. I very may may be living there in the near future.

    Come on, brother. This state welcomes people that don't bend over and take it from the government in Washington D.C. Always has. Always will.

    Black Shipley

  • 92DT said...

    Reading Final Countdown's post above ... I'm not sure I would read that as they can "absolutely be restricted."

    What's clear from that case is this:

    1. The 2nd Amendment now protects an INDIVIDUAL right
    2. The right is subject to reasonable regulations
    3. An all-out ban on handguns is illegal
    4. A ban on missiles, tanks, fighter jets, etc. is ok

    Although the issue has yet to come up, I think the Supreme Court would uphold a ban on high capacity weapons, a requirement for background checks, and many of the other things that are being floated around.

    Final Countdown

  • Status said...

    Oh geez. What is exactly so hard about somebody saying "well I lost it out hunting?"

    What do the cops do then Einstein?

    I'm not saying there's not other ways to keep your guns, but when people say they will use force if they try to take their guns then they are just being stupid.

    signature image signature image

    wutang148713 ●

  • Status said...

    "Sir I'm here to confiscate your weapons. "

    "Somebody broke into my house and stole them."

    "Sorry to hear that. Have a nice day sir."

    lol liberal morons

    Says a guy discussing a situation that never has and never will be proposed. Good job dumbass

    signature image

    !!!

    Grand Slam

  • Marshall Nole said...

    Grand Slam doesn't know what he's talking about and is just a radical left winger on this issue.

    You can clearly see from Scalia's own words that it is vague and makes it hard to interpret one way or another.

    Someone can't read.

    signature image

    !!!

    Grand Slam

Football Recruiting
Basketball Recruiting
Features
Resources
Connect

247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports