George Floyd's brother speaks.

https://twitter.com/jason_howerton/status/1267466257344933888

posted by justincredible

Cigar store owner clears out looters...with a gun.

https://twitter.com/ZVKKARi/status/1267297174469009408

badass right there

posted by SportsAndLady

Okay CC lol

”zero examples of home break ins, zero reason for people to defend their homes with guns” is what I was trying to say. You know what I was saying, come on. Obviously there are examples of gun owners saving businesses from looters. 

Except for mass rioting going on in almost every major city within blocks of millions of residential areas????  It does not matter if there are "zero" examples.....the fire is there.

The mindset of "it's not currently happening so it can never happen" seems rather short sided to me. You're certainly free to live your life with that mindset, but I'd rather be safe than sorry if shit does go down. And given current events, shit can start to go down really quickly. I have insurance policies, as well. You know, just in case something that probably isn't going to happen does.

posted by like_that

I'll admit I lol'd at the bolded.  But anyway, thanks for explaining it to me.  The people setting property on fire, beating the shit out of people, pulling people out of trucks to beat the shit out of them, smashing cars, breaking into small businesses without nikes, etc are just doing it for Nikes.  They would certainly never do any of the aforementioned in someone's neighborhood.  This includes the person that JR just beat the fuck out of in his neighborhood trying to smash his car. Only smashing the car for the Nikes obviously. We are all clear now. 

Glad I was able to make you laugh, you guys need to chillax a bit, just having a discussion. 
 

Your post perfectly proves my point. There are awful people looting/destroying buildings. But 99.99% of the protestors are there for friendly protest and 99.99% of the looters are there for a free pair of nikes. Just like 99.99% of all cops are good people and 99.99% of police interactions are perfectly normal. 
It’d be like saying “becuase of George Foster, every black person in America needs to be afraid of cops” you’re using a small % of the interactions to prove an overall point. It’s wrong. 

posted by justincredible

The mindset of "it's not currently happening so it can never happen" seems rather short sided to me. You're certainly free to live your life with that mindset, but I'd rather be safe than sorry if shit does go down. And given current events, shit can start to go down really quickly. I have insurance policies, as well. You know, just in case something that probably isn't going to happen does.

Not to try to swerve this thread but gun ownership goes WAY beyond what's currently happening due to these current riots. If the wrong people in our government gain power, I have a feeling that gun ownership will be more of a necessity than a luxury.

I’m not sure how you can say you are Pro-2A, and then say this isn’t the time to need a gun. 

I am pro the entire constitution/amendments, but lean more towards the actual language of 2A — someone actually regulating all the guns in your state/county that are owned. Yearly check-ups, etc.

Don’t need to take all the guns, but no need for an auto or semi-auto. I understand it wouldn’t happen overnight, but over time (a long time, like a generation) I think you could eliminate a majority of them from the country.

This is the worst I have ever seen our country. Granted I’m only 34, but it’s a really sad and scary time. I would own a shotgun/handgun if I could, but there is not much of a chance to stay married if I did lol. 

posted by Laley23

I’m not sure how you can say you are Pro-2A, and then say this isn’t the time to need a gun. 

I am pro the entire constitution/amendments, but lean more towards the actual language of 2A — someone actually regulating all the guns in your state/county that are owned. Yearly check-ups, etc.

Don’t need to take all the guns, but no need for an auto or semi-auto. I understand it wouldn’t happen overnight, but over time (a long time, like a generation) I think you could eliminate a majority of them from the country.

This is the worst I have ever seen our country. Granted I’m only 34, but it’s a really sad and scary time. I would own a shotgun/handgun if I could, but there is not much of a chance to stay married if I did lol. 

That's...pretty much every gun owned.

posted by BR1986FB

Not to try to swerve this thread but gun ownership goes WAY beyond what's currently happening due to these current riots. If the wrong people in our government gain power, I have a feeling that gun ownership will be more of a necessity than a luxury.

I REALLY don’t want to get political, so I’ll respond to this and maybe a follow-up or 2. But regarding the bolded...that’s what the amendment means. You aren’t supposed to own a gun for luxury, it’s supposed to be for necessity when the time arises.

I own one gun that isn't semi-automatic. 

posted by Laley23

I REALLY don’t want to get political, so I’ll respond to this and maybe a follow-up or 2. But regarding the bolded...that’s what the amendment means. You aren’t supposed to own a gun for luxury, it’s supposed to be for necessity when the time arises.

You can own a gun for whatever lawful reason you want. Full stop.

posted by Laley23

I’m not sure how you can say you are Pro-2A, and then say this isn’t the time to need a gun. 

I am pro the entire constitution/amendments, but lean more towards the actual language of 2A — someone actually regulating all the guns in your state/county that are owned. Yearly check-ups, etc.

Don’t need to take all the guns, but no need for an auto or semi-auto. I understand it wouldn’t happen overnight, but over time (a long time, like a generation) I think you could eliminate a majority of them from the country.

This is the worst I have ever seen our country. Granted I’m only 34, but it’s a really sad and scary time. I would own a shotgun/handgun if I could, but there is not much of a chance to stay married if I did lol. 

I agree with what you're saying about regulations, check up's, etc but the NRA and other organizations vehemently won't see it that way.

When I was growing up, I was an avid hunter/trapper and was a member of the NTA (National Trappers Association). Whenever a new proposal would come up to ban something, they opposed it wholeheartedly.

As an example, the elimination of bear traps with teeth. Even as a kid I thought traps with teeth were excessively inhumane but the organizations thought was "all they have to do is get their foot in the door and once we give them an inch, the floodgates will open." Same mindset with the NRA.

posted by Laley23

I REALLY don’t want to get political, so I’ll respond to this and maybe a follow-up or 2. But regarding the bolded...that’s what the amendment means. You aren’t supposed to own a gun for luxury, it’s supposed to be for necessity when the time arises.

Actually, the constitution and specifically the 2nd amendment protects our god given birth right (if you don't believe in god take away "god" and it still applies) to own arms.  There is nothing about purchasing a gun out of necessity.  Also not to nit pick, but you also said you learn toward the original language of the amendment, but then contradict yourself by saying "someone actually regulating all the guns in your state/county that are owned. Yearly check-ups, etc."  That's the exact opposite point of the 2A.  The militia isn't regulated by the government.  The militia is made out of individuals.  

posted by like_that

Actually, the constitution and specifically the 2nd amendment protects our god given birth right (if you don't believe in god take away "god" and it still applies) to own arms.  There is nothing about purchasing a gun out of necessity.  Also not to nit pick, but you also said you learn toward the original language of the amendment, but then contradict yourself by saying "someone actually regulating all the guns in your state/county that are owned. Yearly check-ups, etc."  That's the exact opposite point of the 2A.  The militia isn't regulated by the government.  The militia is made out of individuals.  

Indeed. Regulated in that time did not mean the govt got to tell you what you could or couldn't own. Private citizens owned warships when the 2A was written.

posted by Laley23

I’m not sure how you can say you are Pro-2A, and then say this isn’t the time to need a gun. 

I am pro the entire constitution/amendments, but lean more towards the actual language of 2A — someone actually regulating all the guns in your state/county that are owned. Yearly check-ups, etc.

Don’t need to take all the guns, but no need for an auto or semi-auto. I understand it wouldn’t happen overnight, but over time (a long time, like a generation) I think you could eliminate a majority of them from the country.

This is the worst I have ever seen our country. Granted I’m only 34, but it’s a really sad and scary time. I would own a shotgun/handgun if I could, but there is not much of a chance to stay married if I did lol. 

I really am pro-2A. I get in arguments all the time about it with anti 2A people here in Chicago. I just don’t think it’s fair to see some very bad apples doing very bad things in cities and make it seem like that’s going to be some norm. Again, it’s like seeing George Floyd incidents and saying “black people need to fight back against cops”. Just because there are bad apples, doesn’t mean it’s some worldwide emergency. At least I hope. Lol

posted by justincredible

You can own a gun for whatever lawful reason you want. Full stop.

As it stands, yes. But no rights are being infringed on if the law changes. People forget the first part of that amendment. That the right to bear arms, as written, coincides with a well regulated militia. My point is, I think we need to have that part of it be much more, well, regulated. 

posted by Laley23

As it stands, yes. But no rights are being infringed on if the law changes. People forget the first part of that amendment. That the right to bear arms, as written, coincides with a well regulated militia. My point is, I think we need to have that part of it be much more, well, regulated. 

You're wrong, historically. See my above post.

posted by justincredible

I own one gun that isn't semi-automatic. 

musket?

posted by Spock

musket?

Single shot 12 gauge. My first gun, a gift from my uncle when I was in 7th grade.

posted by SportsAndLady

Glad I was able to make you laugh, you guys need to chillax a bit, just having a discussion. 
 

Your post perfectly proves my point. There are awful people looting/destroying buildings. But 99.99% of the protestors are there for friendly protest and 99.99% of the looters are there for a free pair of nikes. Just like 99.99% of all cops are good people and 99.99% of police interactions are perfectly normal. 
It’d be like saying “becuase of George Foster, every black person in America needs to be afraid of cops” you’re using a small % of the interactions to prove an overall point. It’s wrong. 

Those numbers are a bit exaggerated, but sure.  Are you implying the media is overplaying the riots?  Big possibility considering theri track record.  I am no longer in DC, so I can't personally speak to it, but a lot of my friends don't seem to think it's being overplayed and a lot of them are pretty scared the rioting is going to work its way to their homes.  You do bring a good point that there are bad apples in this protest just like there are bad apples in our law enforcement.  I don't think anyone is being fair if they only apply the bad apple argument to one side.

Overall Justin's post above yours said it better than me.  I can't get behind the "it will never happen to me" attitude, especially with the shit going on now. I always thought it was a good idea to arm yourself and this situation makes that argument stronger.   I will agree to disagree with you personally that if you don't want to own a gun you are free to do so.  I will take the insurance policy.  I am willing to bet the people living in the riot cities wish they had that insurance policy right now. 

posted by BR1986FB

I agree with what you're saying about regulations, check up's, etc but the NRA and other organizations vehemently won't see it that way.

Of course they won’t. Doesn’t mean they will win the argument though. The amendment is just an amendment, it can always be changed again and again — or repealed (it won’t ). But I don’t think it’s out of the question Congress/senate/democrat president get something pushed through getting back more to the roots of the right. Whether you agree or not, that’s a very real possibility.

posted by justincredible

I own one gun that isn't semi-automatic. 

Yeah, that’s my bad. I fully meant the automatic. No issues with the semi ones that reload automatically, but I think pulling a trigger should release a single bullet, not 20.

Are you aware of the restrictions on automatic weapons? I have no qualms with or fears of anyone that legally owns an automatic weapon.

New York Mayor doesnt realize that he is part of the problem. 

New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio said several incidents caught on video with police including an officer who drew his gun during protests, a NYPD vehicle moving into a crowd, an officer pushing a woman and more are under investigation.

With regards to the police officer with the gun, he describes the officer in the “middle of a situation that admittedly looked chaotic” but as protesters were in front of the police officer, he drew his gun yesterday. Seeing that video “was absolutely unacceptable.” There will be an “immediate” full investigation of that incident. He noted a superior officer immediately stepped in and moved that officer away from the crowd. “That officer should have his gun and badge taken away from him today. There will be an investigation immediately to determine larger consequences.” 

The video of the vehicle moving through a crowd is under investigation internally within the NYPD, and by the independent review the NYC Mayor set up with the corporation council and department of investigation commissioner. “That was so troubling to the people of this city," de Blasio said about this incident.

He added: “There is no situations where a police vehicle should drive into a crowd of protesters or new Yorkers of any kind. It is dangerous it is unacceptable.”

De Blasio said that videos of an officer pushing a woman to the ground and officers opening a police car door and hitting a protesters are "under review right now.”

“Discipline must be meted out in any situation it is merited," the mayor said.

De Blasio added, “there are some" police officers "who do not belong in this job, and there are some that use violence when they shouldn’t, there are some that are disrespectful to people they serve, there are some that harbor racism in their hearts, these people should not be in the police force and its our job to get them out.”

posted by like_that

Actually, the constitution and specifically the 2nd amendment protects our god given birth right (if you don't believe in god take away "god" and it still applies) to own arms.  There is nothing about purchasing a gun out of necessity.  Also not to nit pick, but you also said you learn toward the original language of the amendment, but then contradict yourself by saying "someone actually regulating all the guns in your state/county that are owned. Yearly check-ups, etc."  That's the exact opposite point of the 2A.  The militia isn't regulated by the government.  The militia is made out of individuals.  

posted by justincredible

Indeed. Regulated in that time did not mean the govt got to tell you what you could or couldn't own. Private citizens owned warships when the 2A was written.

I want it to be regulated by a private citizen, appointed by the “militia”. Not the government. Regulating themselves, so to speak. Not to make it sound like a club...but like a club lol.