What is the 2nd Amendment really for?

[Keep cool-idge]

That said, there's zero chance of widespread gun confiscation in this country in not only our lifetimes, but that of the grandchildren of the youngest whippersnappers on this forum.

that's easy to say from the sidelines.  It's like a guy in Berlin telling a lady in Tel Aviv that she shouldn't worry about Iran getting the bomb, there is zero chance they'd use in your life time.

You might think them confiscating guns in Hawaii is an outlier, others might consider what gun control nuts are thinking in Sacramento (when they aren't groping an intern), Albany or Springfield when they see what Honolulu is doing.

Well there is zero chance Iran will bomb Berlin in my lifetime. 😀

More seriously, I probably do see this somewhat differently because I live in a state where it's far likelier the General Assembly would vote to give people subject to domestic violence restraining orders the right to conceal carry because they hadn't yet been convicted of a crime than it would vote to even just tighten up the gun show loophole.

I honestly don’t get why you want facts about the founding fathers and the second amendment.

Perhaps because facts matter far more than mere opinion?

Mount Vernon is Mount Vernon they don’t make up crap about general Washington,they only give facts.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

That said, there's zero chance of widespread gun confiscation in this country in not only our lifetimes, but that of the grandchildren of the youngest whippersnappers on this forum.

that's easy to say from the sidelines.  It's like a guy in Berlin telling a lady in Tel Aviv that she shouldn't worry about Iran getting the bomb, there is zero chance they'd use in your life time.

You might think them confiscating guns in Hawaii is an outlier, others might consider what gun control nuts are thinking in Sacramento (when they aren't groping an intern), Albany or Springfield when they see what Honolulu is doing.

Well there is zero chance Iran will bomb Berlin in my lifetime. 😀

More seriously, I probably do see this somewhat differently because I live in a state where it's far likelier the General Assembly would vote to give people subject to domestic violence restraining orders the right to conceal carry because they hadn't yet been convicted of a crime than it would vote to even just tighten up the gun show loophole.

I honestly don’t get why you want facts about the founding fathers and the second amendment.

Perhaps because facts matter far more than mere opinion?

Mount Vernon is Mount Vernon they don’t make up crap about general Washington,they only give facts.

In your opinion.

We know certain facts about Washington.

He continued to attend Christian services till the end of his life, however late in life he avoided services where communion would be offered and did not partake of communion.

His writings and speech include multiple references to Religion and Morality but they never involve an unambiguous endorsement of Christianity.

Despite knowing he was on his deathbed, he did not seek to have a clergyman of any sort brought in.   His final words concerned the disposition of his mortal body, not of his soul.

What we make out of these facts is opinion and I fairly confident of the one I have.

[Kingpoleon]

Cough Chicago cough

You really ought to do something about that cough before you choke from trying to draw conclusions from isolated situations rather than overall statistics.  The very fact that Chicago stands out from other communities with similar gun regulations ought to be a clear clue that it ain't the gun laws there that have led to the spike in crime there.

All I’m saying is Chicago has the worst gun laws anywhere and they have more shootings then anywhere in America.

Also it’s not just Chicago there is New York,Connecticut,Massachusetts,rhode island. They have tough gun laws and they still have mass shootings but Vermont which is super pro gun never has any shootings.

Mass Shootings?  Those amount to but a tiny fraction of the deaths from guns.  If that's where your focus is, then it is sadly misplaced if your goal to reduce gun deaths.

Murders? Those amount to but a small fraction of the deaths from knives(most come from accidents). If that’s where your focus is, then it is sadly misplaced if your goal is to reduce knife deaths.

[Unconditional Surrender Truman]

Cough Chicago cough

You really ought to do something about that cough before you choke from trying to draw conclusions from isolated situations rather than overall statistics.  The very fact that Chicago stands out from other communities with similar gun regulations ought to be a clear clue that it ain't the gun laws there that have led to the spike in crime there.

All I’m saying is Chicago has the worst gun laws anywhere and they have more shootings then anywhere in America.

Also it’s not just Chicago there is New York,Connecticut,Massachusetts,rhode island. They have tough gun laws and they still have mass shootings but Vermont which is super pro gun never has any shootings.

Mass Shootings?  Those amount to but a tiny fraction of the deaths from guns.  If that's where your focus is, then it is sadly misplaced if your goal to reduce gun deaths.

Murders? Those amount to but a small fraction of the deaths from knives(most come from accidents). If that’s where your focus is, then it is sadly misplaced if your goal is to reduce knife deaths.

Well, if this statement were true, and if your goal really we're to reduce death-by-knifing, then this would be a reasonable sentiment, wouldn't it?

Of course, comparing firearms to knives is perhaps the most blatant example of apples-to-oranges reasoning, but you know.