In partnership with CBSSports.com
Online Now 748
Online now 1236 Record: 10351 (3/11/2012)
The largest and most active MSU Spartans board on the web
The place to ask questions to SpartanTailgate's recruiting experts
"The Duff" is dedicated to Michigan State football recruiting discussion
"The Bres" is dedicated to Michigan State basketball recruiting discussion
This is your pulpit to preach to the masses about everything from politics to religion
The place to buy, trade or sell Michigan State tickets
For fantasy football and other fantasy sports discussion
You have no favorite boards.
The most viewed topics.
The most replied to topics.
The most up-voted topics.
The most down-voted topics.
The most up-voted posters.
The most down-voted posters.
The most followed posters.
Are you talking about the 2008 and 2010 decissions? If so they were similar decisions that were only challenged because DC and Chicago tried taking away gun rights.
And yes we do have an Individual right to bear arms, just like the citizens had the individual right to bear arms when the Constitution was written.
I love the crying about "mental illness". "We will not discriminate against people with disabilities!!!! Unless we are afraid of them..."
Hopefully 50cent will be there...
I'm all for the right to own a gun. A hunting rifle/shotgun and handguns are fine with me. But this line about needing fully automatic or high capacity magazines in order to defend yourself from a "tyrannical government" is laughable. What is your assault rifle or 50 round drum going to do when this imaginary/hypothetical "tyrannical regime" turns its Abrams tanks, A10 warthogs or tomahawk missile on the masses?
The defense against a tyrannical government line stopped holding water when the government developed means of killing without being in visual range. If you were worried about red coats and their muzzleloaders stealing your sheep then fine, your rifle is very much an equalizer. As it stands now your gun, regardless of how many rounds it holds, is useless against armor, artillery, or air support.
"losing Caleb Benenoch is a blow that Dantonio will never recover from. Izzo has lost it as well. Hoke and Beilein own the state."
A few thousand goat farmers armed with AK-47s in the mountains of Afghanistan.
I am talking about those decisions. They not only struck down those two sets of laws, they expanded the 2nd Amendment beyond any previous interpretation in the country's history. I agree with you that we do have an individual right to bear arms. That time-honored right was established in 2010 (2008 if you live in DC).
There is no legal authority before then that said such a right existed. The 2nd Amendment as originally written (aside from only applying to the federal government and not states) was never interpreted to provide for an individual right. Feel free to look. It's not there.
yeah the government thing is overplayed. they could drop a bomb on you from a 1,000 miles away and you'd be gone before you even knew you were gone. unless you support arming the public with nukes then it really is an irrelevant argument. However, the assault rifle has been very effective in stopping looting and other criminals in times of tragedy and need. banning higher round counts wont do squat for lowering gun violence, it will just ensure the bad guy has more ammo than you. What pisses me off is you have people making laws/policy who dont know the first fucking thing about guns. Like biden giving advice to women to buy a double barrel shotgun instead of something like the AR-15 because the shotgun will be easier to shoot and easier to aim. The AR-15 is one of the most women friendly guns you can have and the double barrel shotgun is a disaster in the hands of most women unless they shoot frequently. Yet he's qualified to say what we should and shouldn't need. Yes there needs to be some reform on how guns are acquired and monitored, there doesn't need to be a change or ban in the types of guns available
This post was edited by Big Fella 13 months ago
Yeah, they were getting slaughtered by the Soviets until we armed and trained them with heavy weaponry. AK-47s weren't doing them much good against heavy armored tanks and helicopters.
I must be crazy to be in a loony bin like this.
A "well regulated" right.
Automatic Assault Rifles are already banned in the US. I am not saying fully automatic rifles should be legalized. I am saying that Semi Automatic Rifles and Shotguns should remain legal. For hunting, recreational shooting, competition and defense.
And trust me I do not think the US Army is going to come attacking my house any time soon. And I am not crazy enough to think I can take out an army. And Ten round magazine are not "high capacity" either is a 8 rd clip. But they are now illegal in a couple states.
What's laughable is that you're pretending that automatic weapons are legal. They aren't, never have been. No one is asking that they be made legal.
You might as well say that the NRA wants everyone to be able to own a nuclear submarine. If you're going to lie, go big.
Why don't you say "our"?
This post was edited by J T 13 months ago
The Soviets slaughtered Afghans 30 years ago. How is that relevant to the current decade-long "war"?
This post was edited by ComeDependState 13 months ago
Exactly, which is the only time period in recent history that would have made sense given your original comment.
Do you ever participate in normal debates? Or do you just throw out irrelevant shit and then spin it to try to make it work? You are a fucking idiot and I'm sure there aren't many here who would admit to enjoying your presence on this board.
Did any Cities or States ever ban these weapons before? Or was this the first time the Supreme Court was presented with the decision on Individuals rights? I know people owned Hand guns in these cities before the cases that were ruled on in these situations.
The Militia is to be well regulated you got the first part correct! Good job! "The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed" That is the part you forgot.
Blow me, cum dungeon.
Tell me again why you can't pick up a case of hand grenades from the local WalMart?
I didn't forget it, it's there in my post: A well regulated "right".
Because I'm a commie.
Automatic weapons were never legal? Tell that to the National Firearms Act of 1934
If I have a 5 shot pump shotgun and 30 rounds of 00 buckshot, am I less capable of carrying out a mass murder than I would be with a semi-automatic rifle chambered in .223 with a 30 round magazine?
247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports