Support NeoGAF

[Barrett2]

Actually, they're legal in something like 30 states.

But don't most states only allow 3 inch switchblades, or something?

I have a 3 inch Boker switchblade I bought a few years ago, but I thought that was usually the max length allowed. Maybe im' wrong.

 

[theBishop]

It's not assuming anything, the technological differences between the United States government and its citizens is profound, there's no arguing to be done, it's a fact. Superior weapons, aircrafts and helicopters, military boats, satellite imaging, etc. They're simply on a different level.

Yeah, the US government has nukes too. My point is a military police state still needs a state. Recent history has plenty of examples of popular resistance movements "fighting the good fight" against a profoundly more powerful regime.

 

[AbortedWalrusFetus]

But don't most states only allow 3 inch switchblades, or something?

I have a 3 inch Boker switchblade I bought a few years ago, but I thought that was usually the max length allowed. Maybe im' wrong.

It varies a lot. Wikipedia has a nice summary.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Switchblade#State_laws

 

[theBishop]

who cares? It would still help the case and amuse us at the same time.

heh, i didn't say I was against game hunting. I just don't think the hobby is so important it justified inclusion in the bill of rights.

 

[Justin Bailey]

I agree, but I think there is a bare minimum of required technology, and since it's not possible to allow a civilized society to own that bare minimum, the amendment should be altered to reflect reality.

EDIT: Fuck, I have to go to work. Good discussion.

Well yes, but how do we know what the bare minimum is in a population-revolt scenario? And it's probably safe to assume that a widespread revolution would encompass defecting troops that could take some of the superior technology with them. That's probably straying from the topic at hand though. . .

I guess my point is: without the 2nd amendment, there would be no spark to a revolution's fire. And as it is currently, that fire could be enough to overthrow an oppressive government.

 

[Hilbert]

It varies a lot. Wikipedia has a nice summary.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Switchblade#State_laws

Sweet Oregon! Legal as long as people can see it!

 

[eznark]

Did GAF talk about the CCSU professor who called the authorities when a kid gave a progun speech?

http://therecorderonline.net/2009/02/24/professor-called-police-after-student-presentation/

I don't think it's necessary to have the same circular arguments in multiple threads so I figured I'd just post it here and laugh at the hoplophobes.

hortly after his professor, Paula Anderson, filed a complaint with the CCSU Police against her student. During the presentation Wahlberg made the point that if students were permitted to conceal carry guns on campus, the violence could have been stopped earlier in many of these cases. He also touched on the controversial idea of free gun zones on college campuses.

That night at work, Wahlberg received a message stating that the campus police “requested his presence”. Upon entering the police station, the officers began to list off firearms that were registered under his name, and questioned him about where he kept them.

They told Wahlberg that they had received a complaint from his professor that his presentation was making students feel “scared and uncomfortable”.

 

[theBishop]

Sweet Oregon! Legal as long as people can see it!

They can see it when i shiv them in the ribcage!

 

[Barrett2]

It varies a lot. Wikipedia has a nice summary.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Switchblade#State_laws

Connecticut allows up to 1.5 inch switchblades!? How generous of them. :lol

 

[Tamanon]

Did GAF talk about the CCSU professor who called the authorities when a kid gave a progun speech?

http://therecorderonline.net/2009/02/24/professor-called-police-after-student-presentation/

I don't think it's necessary to have the same circular arguments in multiple threads so I figured I'd just post it here and laugh at the hoplophobes.

It's a nutbar professor. Good catch, there aren't many of those on campuses!

 

[zombieshavebrains]

It's not assuming anything, the technological differences between the United States government and its citizens is profound, there's no arguing to be done, it's a fact. Superior weapons, aircrafts and helicopters, military boats, satellite imaging, etc. They're simply on a different level.

Well i would hope so.

 

[eznark]

It's a nutbar professor. Good catch, there aren't many of those on campuses!

And they should all be properly ridiculed.

 

[zombieshavebrains]

Yeah, the US government has nukes too. My point is a military police state still needs a state. Recent history has plenty of examples of popular resistance movements "fighting the good fight" against a profoundly more powerful regime.

And a lot of those were backed by US.

 

[theBishop]

Did GAF talk about the CCSU professor who called the authorities when a kid gave a progun speech?

http://therecorderonline.net/2009/02/24/professor-called-police-after-student-presentation/

I don't think it's necessary to have the same circular arguments in multiple threads so I figured I'd just post it here and laugh at the hoplophobes.

I wish there was a more open minded debate about this in general. I do support the right to bear arms, but gun-advocates should be more honest about the volatile quality of deadly weapons in general. People who are not comfortable around firearms shouldn't have to feel terrorized or intimidated that everyone around them is packing.

Advocates would probably tell these people to just buy a gun. That's ridiculous. I'm pro-legalization, but I don't think everyone should be expected smoke weed if they don't want to. There's a line, and probably some reasonable compromise if the debate was happening in good faith on both sides.

 

[theBishop]

And a lot of those were backed by US.

Heh, I think you'll find the US was more often than not backing the regime. So again the whole "profound" disparity argument is debunked.

 

[AbortedWalrusFetus]

I wish there was a more open minded debate about this in general. I do support the right to bear arms, but gun-advocates should be more honest about the volatile quality of deadly weapons in general. People who are not comfortable around firearms shouldn't have to feel terrorized or intimidated that everyone around them is packing.

Advocates would probably tell these people to just buy a gun. That's ridiculous. I'm pro-legalization, but I don't think everyone should be expected smoke weed if they don't want to. There's a line, and probably some reasonable compromise if the debate was happening in good faith on both sides.

There's barely a reason for people to feel terrorized by any of the gun laws that exist. The people that purchase them must undergo background checks in order to get them, register them in their name, and all sorts of things. I'm not worried when an honest person obtains something to defend themselves with or use for sport. Legal gun ownership doesn't really cause any of the things they're afraid of.

 

[ChoklitReign]

My Spidey senses are telling me that the American left will make a push against gun rights relatively soon (year or more) because of the situation in Mexico.

Obama and Holder have strongly considered making the Federal Assault Weapons Ban permanent. It's not like it's going to prevent another VTech from happening again.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assault_weapons_ban_(USA)#Urban_policy_agenda_of_President_Obama

 

[eznark]

I wish there was a more open minded debate about this in general. I do support the right to bear arms, but gun-advocates should be more honest about the volatile quality of deadly weapons in general. People who are not comfortable around firearms shouldn't have to feel terrorized or intimidated that everyone around them is packing.

Advocates would probably tell these people to just buy a gun. That's ridiculous. I'm pro-legalization, but I don't think everyone should be expected smoke weed if they don't want to. There's a line, and probably some reasonable compromise if the debate was happening in good faith on both sides.

He didn't have a gun, he was talking about guns.

As to the fear. that doesn't make any sense. There is nothing stopping violent criminals from getting a gun, and those folks are everywhere. Why would the ability for law abiding citizens to also carry a gun make you more frightened?

 

[Barrett2]

Obama and Holder have strongly considered making the Federal Assault Weapons Ban permanent. It's not like it's going to prevent another VTech from happening again.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assault_weapons_ban_(USA)#Urban_policy_agenda_of_President_Obama

Thats not too big of a deal, though, considering Bush said he would have signed it had the Congress re-submitted it to him.

Probably a good time to buy an assault rifle, though, in case they do pass it again.

 

[theBishop]

There's barely a reason for people to feel terrorized by any of the gun laws that exist. The people that purchase them must undergo background checks in order to get them, register them in their name, and all sorts of things. I'm not worried when an honest person obtains something to defend themselves with or use for sport. Legal gun ownership doesn't really cause any of the things they're afraid of.

I know this isn't a great argument, but you should see the fights that break out in Old City (2nd st Philly) after the bars close. I wouldn't advocate adding (legally acquired) guns to that already-volatile mix.

 

[TimeLike]

These weapons are legal and can be purchased just about anywhere in the country. The laws in many states, however, regulate the concealed carrying of these weapons. Brass knuckles are not illegal. Carrying them in your pocket without a permit is. Same with switchblades.

 

[eznark]

I know this isn't a great argument, but you should see the fights that break out in Old City (2nd st Philly) after the bars close. I wouldn't advocate adding (legally acquired) guns to that already-volatile mix.

Pennsylvania already allows conceal carry.

 

[theBishop]

These weapons are legal and can be purchased just about anywhere in the country. The laws in many states, however, regulate the concealed carrying of these weapons. Brass knuckles are not illegal. Carrying them in your pocket without a permit is. Same with switchblades.

What happens when you remove it from your pocket for the purposes of self defense?

 

[zombieshavebrains]

Obama and Holder have strongly considered making the Federal Assault Weapons Ban permanent. It's not like it's going to prevent another VTech from happening again.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assault_weapons_ban_(USA)#Urban_policy_agenda_of_President_Obama

And rights will be violated and people who want them will still get them anyway.

gg
/uninstall

 

[AbortedWalrusFetus]

I know this isn't a great argument, but you should see the fights that break out in Old City (2nd st Philly) after the bars close. I wouldn't advocate adding (legally acquired) guns to that already-volatile mix.

I live in Philly, actually :lol

See, the thing is, these fights usually get broken up by the police, and they usually come with charges steep enough that a) these people wouldn't pass the required checks b) they would lose the right to bear arms they currently legally can carry. The other thing is, what does it matter? It's not hard to get a gun illegally here, either, and if guns were going to get added to that mix they already would. But Old City? I don't really hit the bar scene there much (it hasn't been good in like five years) but I just can't picture fights in that part of town! I live in Fairmount and I can barely picture them here either though.

 

[ZeroCypher]

Saw the thread title and thought of this (probably because I'm reading it now)

 

[Barrett2]

Do you guys remember the old SNL skit about the Brady Bill? Phil Hartman tried to buy a handgun, but they told him he had to wait three days, and in the mean-time gave him a ball & chain as a weapon to use. That night burglars broke into his home and murdered his family while he helplessly swung the ball and chain, cursing the Brady Bill. :lol

 

[theBishop]

Pennsylvania already allows conceal carry.

And Philly is already in the top 10 for violent crime. Of course I know "guns don't kill people, etc". All I'm saying is people on the pro-gun control side tend to dismiss the civil liberties issues of gun ownership and most of the advocates of gun ownership I've met are absolutist. They'll point to po-dunk Kennesaw GA and act like that's a representative case.

 

[theBishop]

I don't really hit the bar scene there much (it hasn't been good in like five years) but I just can't picture fights in that part of town! I live in Fairmount and I can barely picture them here either though.

It's mainly drunk Northern Liberties douchebags fistfighting over nothing.

 

[eznark]

It's mainly drunk Northern Liberties douchebags fistfighting over nothing.

Who could already legally carry a firearm if they so chose, so again, your fears are irrational.

 

[notsol337]

Nope, it was written to make sure that citizens have the weaponry to rise up and overthrow the government should that become necessary. And since we aren't allowed to have RPG's and M1 Abrams tanks, it's an obsolete amendment that needs to be rewritten.

People in tanks have to sleep too, that's when you get them!

 

[Monroeski]

What happens when you remove it from your pocket for the purposes of self defense?

Well, I would imagine that if it is illegal when it's in your pocket, it wouldn't become legal when you start to brandish it with the attempt to injure (self defense or not).

I'm not a lawyer, though, so I don't know.