| Author | Thread |
|
|
03/15/2014 11:52:22 PM · #26 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by cowboy221977:
I do feel this challenge suggestion is going to rant.......but hell yeah what gun should I enter.... I belive in the 2nd amendment unlike a lot of people on this site |
Unless you want to restrict the entries to only those who "believe in the Second Amendment" (with the same imterpretation you do) that part is totally unnecessary to the challenge description. I think the earlier suggestion ofTopic: Guns
Description: N/A was fine. I think you'd get a lot of pictures of finely-crafted machinery ...
In fact, it's such a good suggestion I've put it into the pool of available challenge topics that way ... but SC members have no control or knowledge of when or if any particular challenge gets scheduled ... :-) |
I was only making the statement that when people talk or in some cases even reference firearms on this site the liberal element attacks
|
|
|
|
03/15/2014 11:57:00 PM · #27 |
Originally posted by cowboy221977:
I believe in the 2nd amendment unlike a lot of people on this site |
Seriously, Adam, you DO realize that the second amendment has been the subject of spirited, and often acrimonious, debate since its ratification and on up to the present day, right? That men of great intellect and demonstrable goodwill have struggled mightily over how to remain true to spirit of the amendment without gutting its protections? That just because someone disagrees with your particular stance in the debate does not make them "anti second amendment"? That the phrase "well regulated" actually is part of the wording of the amendment, making it clear that the founding fathers saw the need for at least SOME regulation? The debate would go a LOT better if you didn't work so hard at polarizing it...
Message edited by author 2014-03-15 23:57:42. |
|
|
|
03/16/2014 12:12:12 AM · #28 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Originally posted by cowboy221977:
I believe in the 2nd amendment unlike a lot of people on this site |
Seriously, Adam, you DO realize that the second amendment has been the subject of spirited, and often acrimonious, debate since its ratification and on up to the present day, right? That men of great intellect and demonstrable goodwill have struggled mightily over how to remain true to spirit of the amendment without gutting its protections? That just because someone disagrees with your particular stance in the debate does not make them "anti second amendment"? That the phrase "well regulated" actually is part of the wording of the amendment, making it clear that the founding fathers saw the need for at least SOME regulation? The debate would go a LOT better if you didn't work so hard at polarizing it... |
Thank you Robert...... I understand that there should be controls on firearms. We have background checks on firearms (also in the state of La you have to have a background check at gun shows) Also the "assault rifle".....is not an assault rifle. I have seen alot of dems say we need to outlaw assault rifles because they are fully auto... The only prob the ones that they have singled out are semi-auto
|
|
|
|
03/16/2014 03:23:32 AM · #29 |
Next...
Message edited by author 2014-03-16 03:39:41. |
|
|
|
03/16/2014 04:06:08 AM · #30 |
I support the ownership of firearms by law abiding citizens!
I also usually vote Democrat.
Go figure.. |
|
|
|
03/16/2014 10:11:00 AM · #31 |
Originally posted by cowboy221977:
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Originally posted by cowboy221977:
I believe in the 2nd amendment unlike a lot of people on this site |
Seriously, Adam, you DO realize that the second amendment has been the subject of spirited, and often acrimonious, debate since its ratification and on up to the present day, right? That men of great intellect and demonstrable goodwill have struggled mightily over how to remain true to spirit of the amendment without gutting its protections? That just because someone disagrees with your particular stance in the debate does not make them "anti second amendment"? That the phrase "well regulated" actually is part of the wording of the amendment, making it clear that the founding fathers saw the need for at least SOME regulation? The debate would go a LOT better if you didn't work so hard at polarizing it... |
Thank you Robert...... I understand that there should be controls on firearms. We have background checks on firearms (also in the state of La you have to have a background check at gun shows) Also the "assault rifle".....is not an assault rifle. I have seen alot of dems say we need to outlaw assault rifles because they are fully auto... The only prob the ones that they have singled out are semi-auto |
I've seen plenty of posts on DPC that ARE anti-2nd Amendment. |
|
|
|
03/16/2014 10:13:04 AM · #32 |
Personally, I don't want to see a gun challenge. Guns aren't interesting looking at all, and we see enough of them in movies.
Off photo topic, but on the gun issue, this is an interesting paper for those who still believe you are safer with a gun. If you're short on time, just read the discussion.
//aje.oxfordjournals.org/content/160/10/929.full |
|
|
|
03/16/2014 10:37:21 AM · #33 |
I am generally on the side of the fence that believes we need to have some very serious controls and restrictions on guns. It is just too damn easy for someone to have an emotional snap and go on a killing spree. Guns make it easy. How often do we see this in the news? Pretty regularly. I hear the argument about "responsible gun owners", and sort of agree, but today's "responsible gun owner" could have an emotional breakdown tomorrow.
I also agree with the gun proponents who say that the criminal element will love gun restrictions because their potential victims will be unarmed. There are too many guns out there to be able to gain real control over where they are. I don't agree that putting more guns in more hands is a good solution, though.
It is a double edged sword and there is not an easy answer.
Message edited by author 2014-03-16 10:38:56.
|
|
|
|
03/16/2014 12:08:56 PM · #34 |
Originally posted by cowboy221977:
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Originally posted by cowboy221977:
I believe in the 2nd amendment unlike a lot of people on this site |
Seriously, Adam, you DO realize that the second amendment has been the subject of spirited, and often acrimonious, debate since its ratification and on up to the present day, right? That men of great intellect and demonstrable goodwill have struggled mightily over how to remain true to spirit of the amendment without gutting its protections? That just because someone disagrees with your particular stance in the debate does not make them "anti second amendment"? That the phrase "well regulated" actually is part of the wording of the amendment, making it clear that the founding fathers saw the need for at least SOME regulation? The debate would go a LOT better if you didn't work so hard at polarizing it... |
Thank you Robert...... I understand that there should be controls on firearms. We have background checks on firearms (also in the state of La you have to have a background check at gun shows) Also the "assault rifle".....is not an assault rifle. I have seen alot of dems say we need to outlaw assault rifles because they are fully auto... The only prob the ones that they have singled out are semi-auto |
You mean like this dem?
âI do not believe in taking away the right of the citizen for sporting, for hunting and so forth, or for home defense. But I do believe that an AK-47, a machine gun, is not a sporting weapon or needed for defense of a home.”"
--Ronald Reagan, in a speech at his 78th birthday celebration in Los Angeles on February 6, 1989.
//www.democraticunderground.com/10022209608 |
|
|
|
03/16/2014 12:41:35 PM · #35 |
Originally posted by Kelli:
You mean like this dem?
âI do not believe in taking away the right of the citizen for sporting, for hunting and so forth, or for home defense. But I do believe that an AK-47, a machine gun, is not a sporting weapon or needed for defense of a home.â"
--Ronald Reagan, in a speech at his 78th birthday celebration in Los Angeles on February 6, 1989. |
Sensible gun legislation was not a particularly partisan issue and guns were not even considered an individual right until District of Columbia vs. Heller squeaked by on a 5-4 vote in 2008 (a case that the NRA declined to be a part of). That was only 6 years ago, and contrary to the historical delusions of gun fanatics, we've actually been moving AWAY from gun control. |
|
|
|
03/16/2014 01:03:19 PM · #36 |
Originally posted by Kelli:
Originally posted by cowboy221977:
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Originally posted by cowboy221977:
I believe in the 2nd amendment unlike a lot of people on this site |
Seriously, Adam, you DO realize that the second amendment has been the subject of spirited, and often acrimonious, debate since its ratification and on up to the present day, right? That men of great intellect and demonstrable goodwill have struggled mightily over how to remain true to spirit of the amendment without gutting its protections? That just because someone disagrees with your particular stance in the debate does not make them "anti second amendment"? That the phrase "well regulated" actually is part of the wording of the amendment, making it clear that the founding fathers saw the need for at least SOME regulation? The debate would go a LOT better if you didn't work so hard at polarizing it... |
Thank you Robert...... I understand that there should be controls on firearms. We have background checks on firearms (also in the state of La you have to have a background check at gun shows) Also the "assault rifle".....is not an assault rifle. I have seen alot of dems say we need to outlaw assault rifles because they are fully auto... The only prob the ones that they have singled out are semi-auto |
You mean like this dem?
âI do not believe in taking away the right of the citizen for sporting, for hunting and so forth, or for home defense. But I do believe that an AK-47, a machine gun, is not a sporting weapon or needed for defense of a home.â"
--Ronald Reagan, in a speech at his 78th birthday celebration in Los Angeles on February 6, 1989.
//www.democraticunderground.com/10022209608 |
Yes, an AK-47, a fully automatic weapon. Currently NOT something you can buy at your local sporting good store, if at all in the US.
You might be able to find one for sale from a source that sells class III firearms, but you'll need a special license and something like $30,000. make that $55,000. I found only one listed online. That doesn't count the costs of the special licenses and the charges from the dealers who are required to receive the weapon an file the paperwork.
Message edited by author 2014-03-16 13:29:02. |
|
|
|
03/16/2014 02:02:11 PM · #37 |
Originally posted by Spork99:
Originally posted by Kelli:
Originally posted by cowboy221977:
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Originally posted by cowboy221977:
I believe in the 2nd amendment unlike a lot of people on this site |
Seriously, Adam, you DO realize that the second amendment has been the subject of spirited, and often acrimonious, debate since its ratification and on up to the present day, right? That men of great intellect and demonstrable goodwill have struggled mightily over how to remain true to spirit of the amendment without gutting its protections? That just because someone disagrees with your particular stance in the debate does not make them "anti second amendment"? That the phrase "well regulated" actually is part of the wording of the amendment, making it clear that the founding fathers saw the need for at least SOME regulation? The debate would go a LOT better if you didn't work so hard at polarizing it... |
Thank you Robert...... I understand that there should be controls on firearms. We have background checks on firearms (also in the state of La you have to have a background check at gun shows) Also the "assault rifle".....is not an assault rifle. I have seen alot of dems say we need to outlaw assault rifles because they are fully auto... The only prob the ones that they have singled out are semi-auto |
You mean like this dem?
âI do not believe in taking away the right of the citizen for sporting, for hunting and so forth, or for home defense. But I do believe that an AK-47, a machine gun, is not a sporting weapon or needed for defense of a home.â"
--Ronald Reagan, in a speech at his 78th birthday celebration in Los Angeles on February 6, 1989.
//www.democraticunderground.com/10022209608 |
Yes, an AK-47, a fully automatic weapon. Currently NOT something you can buy at your local sporting good store, if at all in the US.
You might be able to find one for sale from a source that sells class III firearms, but you'll need a special license and something like $30,000. make that $55,000. I found only one listed online. That doesn't count the costs of the special licenses and the charges from the dealers who are required to receive the weapon an file the paperwork. |
I was pointing out to Adam that it's not an issue only for democrats. If you follow that link, there's a whole page of gun quotes from Reagan, who I'm pretty sure wasn't a democrat. |
|
|
|
03/16/2014 03:32:21 PM · #38 |
Originally posted by Kelli:
Originally posted by Spork99:
Originally posted by Kelli:
Originally posted by cowboy221977:
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Originally posted by cowboy221977:
I believe in the 2nd amendment unlike a lot of people on this site |
Seriously, Adam, you DO realize that the second amendment has been the subject of spirited, and often acrimonious, debate since its ratification and on up to the present day, right? That men of great intellect and demonstrable goodwill have struggled mightily over how to remain true to spirit of the amendment without gutting its protections? That just because someone disagrees with your particular stance in the debate does not make them "anti second amendment"? That the phrase "well regulated" actually is part of the wording of the amendment, making it clear that the founding fathers saw the need for at least SOME regulation? The debate would go a LOT better if you didn't work so hard at polarizing it... |
Thank you Robert...... I understand that there should be controls on firearms. We have background checks on firearms (also in the state of La you have to have a background check at gun shows) Also the "assault rifle".....is not an assault rifle. I have seen alot of dems say we need to outlaw assault rifles because they are fully auto... The only prob the ones that they have singled out are semi-auto |
You mean like this dem?
âI do not believe in taking away the right of the citizen for sporting, for hunting and so forth, or for home defense. But I do believe that an AK-47, a machine gun, is not a sporting weapon or needed for defense of a home.â"
--Ronald Reagan, in a speech at his 78th birthday celebration in Los Angeles on February 6, 1989.
//www.democraticunderground.com/10022209608 |
Yes, an AK-47, a fully automatic weapon. Currently NOT something you can buy at your local sporting good store, if at all in the US.
You might be able to find one for sale from a source that sells class III firearms, but you'll need a special license and something like $30,000. make that $55,000. I found only one listed online. That doesn't count the costs of the special licenses and the charges from the dealers who are required to receive the weapon an file the paperwork. |
I was pointing out to Adam that it's not an issue only for democrats. If you follow that link, there's a whole page of gun quotes from Reagan, who I'm pretty sure wasn't a democrat. |
And most of the items from his quotes that address specific measures are in place.
|
|
|
|
03/16/2014 04:07:44 PM · #39 |
Originally posted by cowboy221977:
I do feel this challenge suggestion is going to rant.......but hell yeah what gun should I enter.... I belive in the 2nd amendment unlike a lot of people on this site |
...ever think that the 2nd amendment has no impact whatsoever on a lot of us?
Ray |
|
|
|
03/16/2014 04:19:57 PM · #40 |
Originally posted by rcollier:
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by tph1:
Make a political statement. Show your support for the Second Amendment (usa); Perhaps a commentary on the ridiculousness of it all... |
You do realize not everyone will post a picture expressing the same point of view ... |
In all fairness, I think that's what the OP meant with "Perhaps a commentary on the ridiculousness of it all...". Express a counterpoint to supporting the Second Ammendment. At least that was the way I took it.
Although the challenge might be interesting, the voting will be way too politically charged to have any type of fairness to it. Might be some interesting voting patterns though, many pictures with votes in the range of 1-3 and 8-10, with little to no middle ground. Of course, it is also completely US centric, so I am not sure how well it will be received to the non US members.
If it is a challenge, it should be Expert Editing. I want to see Gyaban's take on Robin Williams line "It's in the constitution, you have the right to bear arms, or the right to arm bears...". |
Just a note on my original post... I do not own a gun. I live in the country were hunting is almost a coming of age event. But I a have never been a victim of gun violence. I am on the fence with regard to modern interpretations of the second amendment. BUT a controversial topic would seem to make a good challenge subject. |
|
|
|
03/16/2014 04:21:52 PM · #41 |
Originally posted by RayEthier:
Originally posted by cowboy221977:
I do feel this challenge suggestion is going to rant.......but hell yeah what gun should I enter.... I belive in the 2nd amendment unlike a lot of people on this site |
...ever think that the 2nd amendment has no impact whatsoever on a lot of us?
Ray |
Every one of the Bill of rights impact all of us.. |
|
|
|
03/16/2014 04:25:26 PM · #42 |
Originally posted by see:
Originally posted by RayEthier:
...ever think that the 2nd amendment has no impact whatsoever on a lot of us?
Ray |
Every one of the Bill of rights impact all of us.. |
(my bold)
Alan, how? |
|
|
|
03/16/2014 04:34:15 PM · #43 |
Originally posted by SaraR:
Originally posted by see:
Originally posted by RayEthier:
...ever think that the 2nd amendment has no impact whatsoever on a lot of us?
Ray |
Every one of the Bill of rights impact all of us.. |
(my bold)
Alan, how? |
Maybe you missed it. Canada is now a US state, along with the 194 other former countries. However we still suck at soccer. Go figure. |
|
|
|
03/16/2014 04:45:05 PM · #44 |
Originally posted by SaraR:
Originally posted by see:
Originally posted by RayEthier:
...ever think that the 2nd amendment has no impact whatsoever on a lot of us?
Ray |
Every one of the Bill of rights impact all of us.. |
(my bold)
Alan, how? |
Yea, Ok, us referring to USA. The Bill of Rights of the United States, has been mugged, and is currently on life support, awaiting further laws to pull the plug.
|
|
|
|
03/17/2014 12:25:17 AM · #45 |
Originally posted by see:
Originally posted by SaraR:
Originally posted by see:
Originally posted by RayEthier:
...ever think that the 2nd amendment has no impact whatsoever on a lot of us?
Ray |
Every one of the Bill of rights impact all of us.. |
(my bold)
Alan, how? |
Yea, Ok, us referring to USA. The Bill of Rights of the United States, has been mugged, and is currently on life support, awaiting further laws to pull the plug. |
The 4th Amendment's all but goneâ¦which one's next?
|
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 07/25/2025 09:32:23 PM EDT.
