Range_This11

Ah right, so what you're saying is since it would be "Unconstitutional" to appeal the Constitution, we can never EVER appeal it? Damn it I really didn't want these laws to exist for all eternity!

Well I guess that about clears all the arguing up, guys. Time to head home.

The dolts that start the quote chain of about 6 quotes, don't hide them, and then put one sentence of reply back. It's easy: just delete all quotes previous to the one you're replying to when you make your post. I want to colon punch these r-tards.

Last night I had myself a little movie marathon Goodfellas was up to bat first and knocked a home-run for me. This movie I would even classify as better than The Godfather, and I've always been a huge Godfather advocate. Lawrence of Arabia This movie really struck a chord with me. The filming and acting were absolutely beautiful. This is how color movies should look like. Peter O'Toole gives an absolutely stunning performance that makes you wonder why actors like him don't come around anymore. The best 4 hours of my life.

ZOMG how did you know??? :ohnoes: But thanks to all repliers so far :D

99 Defence all through Slayer. I bet you can't guess what 99 I'm going to get next :

Yeah, considering he was elected by the Electoral College :roll:

I don't watch The Simpsons, but from what I've heard, it actually has some pretty good social commentary. I read books; things that educate me that were written by people who use critical thinking and logic as virtues. Reading a book is something that you might want to try doing sometime.

Did you not read anything I said? White male slave and land owners created this constitution. Notice how they left out any rights to people that could challenge them: Slaves and women. They made it so they could stay in power, and they did for over 90 years until a CIVIL WAR had to occur to stop the atrocities of slavery. Hell, women didn't even get the right to vote until the 1900s. Take off your blinders and look at the facts for once. Our founding fathers gave us a lot of good things, but their motives were not always as they seem.

Although you bring up very sound pro-gun arguments, I have to draw the line with this statement. Bearing arms is not even in the same league as freedom of speech or religion. Since I have the freedom of speech, I can say (within reason) anything I want to say about our government. Since I have freedom of religion, I can practice something I want to in my own home, or organize a gathering of like-minded individuals. Since I have the right to bear arms I now have the ability to kill someone? That seems to be overstepping a few bounds there. Laws that are 230 years old NEED to be amended. We don't live under the same circumstances we did when the Constitution was written. The Constitution was written by rich, white land and slave owners who cared about nothing but personal gain, you can see it in the original bill of rights. So when you say amending the Constitution is unacceptable, you're saying the right for women to vote or say, banning slavery is unacceptable too, right? Give it 30 years and I can 99% guarantee you that the generation of pro-war, pro-gun, and anti-progression will be all dead and we'll finally get some laws that fit a modern society.

Change, change, and....a little more change right? :D

I don't think so, that was just my personal opinion. I'm big on society brainwashing theories (no sarcasm), but that's stretching it. I'd think a little more highly of a person who forms a well stated argument with a high end vocabulary than someone who is dropping the F-Bomb every other world and can't get through the sentence without saying "um" or "like".

Swearing has it's place, but in general speaking, you sound a lot more intelligent if you form an argument without using swear words. Don't get me wrong, I love swearing. I play hockey, swearing is encoded in my DNA.

Maybe this might help you :) http://www.criminology.fsu.edu/faculty/nute/FScareers.html

See in your utopian society, religion is the focal point. Now think of it from a person who doesn't believe in your religion. Aren't you oppressing them? In a true harmonized society religion would play no part in the government at all. Every citizen would be allowed to believe what they want, and practice what they want. Churches of all kinds would exist together, realizing that they believe different things, yet never fighting because of it. That would be my idea of utopia, and I think it would work just fine. To all christians, be happy that you've found your salvation in something you're adamant on, but never press it on another person, because there are some of us who aren't as lucky as you. We haven't found our true calling and aren't settling for anything less.

I think the big question that every person who apposes homosexuality needs to ask themselves is: How is this affecting me? Sit down and think about it for awhile. How do people being gay affect my every day life? When you're done, let me know, because I know for a fact that you can't think of one valid reason why a homosexual is wrong for feeling the way he or she does and how it could possibly affect your every day life. People are people. There are going to be tall people, short people, skinny people, fat people, white, black, brown, red, yellow, and everything in between people. You need to grow up and realize there are more people in the world than just you and your opinions, and news flash: They ain't changin' for you.

I do not capitalize them because I do not believe in them. Thanks Brando for saving me my time and angst typing that out for me :D To everyone else: Some day when you grow up, you'll understand. I was in your position too, all I knew was christianity, but someday you'll see that there are other things out there. You'll question it, you might even denounce your own beliefs, but until you've been exposed to it, please try not to bring down another human being's beliefs. You and I? We're not different in one aspect.

Atheist leaning towards Agnosticism. But that was a cute play on words :lol:

You can't even spell atheists correctly. Just because a person doesn't believe in your god doesn't mean that they don't love life just as much as you, love other people just as much as you, or want the same things as you. Atheists, in general, are NOT unhappy people. We're just the same as you; no better, no worse.

Yes we're so very much untrusted. So why is it that The United States of America entrusted a few atheists to make the atomic bomb? In God We Trust, right? Or is it in atheists we trust? I'm confused.... Please, I'm absolutely DYING to know where you found that atheists are the most untrusted group in the world, because the last time I checked, they are usually more trusted due to the fact they're not being blinded by any personal propaganda.

So according to your theory, and correct me if I'm wrong here, you state that since "criminals are going to get guns anyways" we should just let guns be legal and give up. Are you giving up completely on trying to control crime? I'll give you a few numbers that I have found through my research. Granted that these stats are from 1990, I think they still hold relevance to the conversation. Let's do the Math, Jack. 64,615 self defense cases using firearms annually. Take 20% of 64,615 because Police Officers are not considered to be private citizens whilst on duty. That leaves us 12,913 cases where Police Officers used self defense via a gun. Now we're down to 51,702 cases annually. Since you like to bring up "crackhead thugs breaking into your house" all the time, we'll reduce it by another 29% because as the article says, 71% of the time, crimes are committed by a stranger. 29% of 51,702 people using firearms in self defense is 15,511. TOTAL SELF DEFENSE CASES ANNUALLY USING A FIREARM: 36,191. Now it seems to me that your "fact" that 2 million times a year, guns are used in self defense is total bull $hit. You back it up with no factual evidence. Even though these stats that I have are from 1990, I find it VERY hard to believe that gun defense has increased by 1.93 MILLION cases per year annually. Since most gun defense facts are very misconstrued, I might remind you that self-defense using a gun ONLY includes when the gun is fired, not when it is simply held as a focal point for power in a situation (which by the way in most studies that are pro-gun control, it is considered as self defense to just hold the gun; very incorrect and misleading). Well, now it's time to take apart your Washington D.C. points. Notice how it clearly states that any firearms registered before 1976 are still considered to be legal? Well that sure sheds a different light on your argument doesn't it? Could this Act be to possibly...oh...I don't know...maybe prevent more hand-gun related incidents from happening and not an outright attack on existing gun owners? So it looks to me that this Act has done a very good job considering the fact that After all that honest research I did, I think I need a glass of Kool-Aid.

I don't care how good this movie is, there is no way that a superhero movie should be #1 on Imdb's 250 greatest movies of all time. It's the equivalent of taking a giant steaming dump on all of Hollywood's wonderful movie history.

Give the wrong person the means to kill a person and they'll succeed more times than not. If we take away the legal possession of hand guns, I can guarantee you that murders (THROUGH THE USE OF HAND GUNS) will decrease. Crime may not decrease, but that's not what we're debating. I ask it again: What is the point of owning a hand gun other than to injure or kill another human being?

Guns are the means by which murders are caused. You're basically trying to say that the only way that they should be banned is if it is acting on its own means. That's like saying to a family that had a person killed by a drunk driver that alcohol wasn't a main contributor to the death. All you're doing is trying to find a loophole in the way things are worded and in that, you're failing to see the big picture. I asked you to compare Chicago pre and post gun ban, yet you produced irrelevant facts about Washington D.C. which is not even CLOSE to having the same amount of crime both historically and in the present day. Give me the numbers or your point is moot.

I was afraid to take a bath, until Mr. Rogers taught me that "You can never go down the drain!". Ah, I miss that show.