Discussing gun bans and the second ammendment.

I was suprised to see some support for the 2nd Ammendment

It's being very balanced so far... 20 minutes in, and my blood pressure is NOT rising yet!

Actually, it's going pretty well in favor of the 2nd in it's REAL intention.

aarrrggh!!!!

just saw the resturant table scene and the anti saying to the reluctant senator help us "fight the good fight" and "get guns off the street".

excuse me while i puke.


now james garner on the other hand is saying someting to the tune of "homes w/ guns tend to have less crime."  hmmmmmm, no $hit!

may need to watch the rest.  knowing the tv media,  the end will probably make me puke again.

Be sure to let us West Coast boys know if it is worth staying up for.  It comes on at ten O'clock and I don't want to loose good sleep time if it is a bunch of crap.

Some ass just tried to change the position of one of the justices that was against the ban by  bring up the fact that a gun was stolen from his home and used in a crime.  He implied that he was irresponsible for allowing his gun to be stolen.  How about blaming the prick that stole the weapon.

and the smackdown from the Justices... the Pro Control freak got smacked down.  I applauded out loud!!

and the pro control freak senator is pulling some low down, backhanded slimy shit.  I hope the sheeple see that, and realize the pro control morons are like that!

Same here.
Blame the POS that stole the gun.  
Dont forget,
if the man was in "chicago" proper, it was REGISTERED TO THE CITY!!  
He was LICENCED.
If he had CCW, he has TRAINING.

He did mention it was LOCKED UP. POS broke into that.
c-rock

It seems fairly well balanced. The argument of banning all guns to keep them out of the hands of criminals and children doesn't make a lot of sense. The last time I checked it was illegal to commit a crime with a gun and most cities have laws that makes it a crime to not secure your weapons.

I like the quote concerning the number of guns in the US and the percent of those guns used in crimes, it was something like .01%

Last time I checked,  it was illegal to commit a crime, weather or not a gun was used in the commission of the crime.
And THAT is the problem. IF a perp isn't going to follow the law without a gun, why would he /she follow any gun laws??
Wait.. that makes sense.  And the libs don't like that....

That was, without a doubt, the most balanced fictional treatment of the 2nd amendment I've ever heard of, much less seen.

Five to Four, the ban is struck down.

Maybe there's hope for Hollywood yet.

So a couple caved, but in the end, they struck down the ban 5-4.  What pissed me off is the one justice that seemed to be pro RKBA says something like "the constitution would allow reasonable restrictions such as licensing and registration"

ugh...  It was a good show, and I think it was more Pro RKBA than anti, but still had some of the cliche uninformed opinions.  I am greatful that it wasn't just a gun-owner bashing, and that there was a lot said that could get some fence sitters thinking more.  I think it's score one for Pro RKBA's like us.  

Once we can get more people to believe the 2nd protects an individual right, then they'll see that one type of gun is not really much different than any other, and we'll get them off our backs about 'assualt weapons'

:)

Yes I know but commiting a crime with a gun generally makes for a longer prison term.  

BTW what the hell was the liberal justice talking about by saying she was going to call for more cases that address automatic weapons, teflon bullets, and assault rifles.  These all seem to be overly regulated already.

Excuse me whilst I puke.

Ester:  A concurring opinion that encourages more 2nd Amendment cases that address Teflon Coated Bullets, Automatic Weapons and Assault Weapons.

Give me a freakin break.

We in the shooting community all know teflon bullets are bogus .. why can't we dispell this stupid myth.  Slug at 1100 fps vs teflon coated slug at 1100 fps ... same same.

Automatic weapons ... she needs to read the NFA.

Assault Weapons ... haven't liberal folks even agreed that the ban had no appreciable affect.

I feel sick.

Ryan

the end kinda bothered me even though the gun ban was stuck down.  note there were deals and compromises that put restictions such things as automatic weapons and "teflon coated bullets."  

scary is the thought that too many of these real life deals and compromises will slowly erode and distort our rights.  

i give the show three and one half pukes!!!

That little kid smoked the armed robber, the show cant be all that bad :)

HEHEHE...I was actually cleaning my AR and watching this.

I really did not like the ending..the comment about assault weapons, automatic weapons..and such.

Overall....for tv...it was not that bad.

medcop

The war is not won yet!  Regardless of who seems to be for our side.

Ben

Teflon coated bulets, were real for a while.  They were armor piercing amumunition marketed under the name KTW.  They were invented by cops, sold by cops to cops and are now collector items.  They were basically steel slugs for the armor piercing capability and were teflon coated to reduce barrel wear.  What none of the anti's get, or care if they get, is that the teflon coating had nothing to do with the armor piercing effect.

They were originally developed to allow .38 specials to pierce car bodies.  The perception was that cops were limited to issue .38s and the bad guys could use magnums.

Don't kid yourself about CBS as a corporation though. I was on their website a couple weeks ago and came across some anti-gun bs that had no place on an entertainment page...

As soon as I saw what the episode was about I shut the television off.  Then my wife witched at me for jumping to conclusions, (which I do whenever I see mass media addressing the 2nd Amendment) so I turned it back on.  I was pleasantly surprised that by and large it was a balanced show.

The positives:  Showing the democratic schmuck for the manipulating a-hole he was willing to break laws and confidences to achieve his goal.

The conversion of the anti-gun Ester.

Working to point out that guns are used to save lives on a daily basis

Switzerland

Low criminal use of firearms in comparison to total numbers and the point that non-criminals shouldn't be punished.

Showing the anti- gun lawyer for the bigoted @$$ that he was when he said that anyone who owned guns but was not a member of his conception of the well regulated militia should be punished.

Joe Montagne's arguments and quotations of the founders that CLEARLY demonstrated their intent to protect firearms ownership as an individual right.

Montagne's character's sticking to his guns despite the personal tragedy and impact. He kept the emotion out of his opinion as much as was practical.

A Pro I think, but not really helpful is that the show portrayed some anti-gun folks as good-intentioned human beings, who while misinformed, are not jack booted thugs.  Others, such as the senator, were properly portrayed as the political hacks they are.  His comment that he was not accountable to anyone was clearly wrong.  Senators are accountable to their constituencies and the people of the United States of America. They are subject to us, not we to them.


Cons:

The registration and licensing restrictions.

THe compromise in the end that would in real life, open us up for a total ban on so-called assault weapons, full-auto/NFA firearms and any ammunition that could mis-defined as armor piercing based on arbitrary definitions.


The missed point that the Constitution of the United States and Bill of Rights, as originally written and not withstanding subsequent amendments and legislation, was an edict handed down by the people to the government instructing it as to what powers and duties were delegated to it BY THE PEOPLE, and ennumerating the RIGHTS of the people that government could not infringe except under extremely limited circumstances.  The Cosntitution is NOT intended to limit or empower the people, that is ASSUMED by the founders and stated in the preamble.  The Constitution is enforced UPON government itself for the protection of the people from government.  That is, in my opinion, a critical issues that is generally skipped over and informs any discussion of the Constitution and Bill of Rights.

Another missed opportunity was failing to point out thatthe law of the time stipulated that the militia of the 18th and early 19th century was composed of the whole body of men between the ages of x and y and did not require specific training schedules.