Charlton Heston Dies At 83

[Cassius]

Rest in Peace Mr Heston, though I was sure you had died years ago

I thought so too.

 

[chica]

Don't tread on me and you won't get your f***ing head shot off, socialist.

May I use this as my signature?

The day I ask a teenaged European whether the American people should abolish our Bill of Rights would be the day I take my gun and put a bullet into my brain.

Wait, I thought it had already been abolished? Or was it habeas corpus? Or both?

 

[troubleluvsme]

Protect it from whom? Robbers with guns? If there was sufficient gun control most of them wouldn't have guns, you are fueling the need to have a gun by having a gun.

Oh please.
You are making yourself sound foolish.
I will not discuss this further with you.

 

[Cassius]

If there was sufficient gun control most of them wouldn't have guns, you are fueling the need to have a gun by having a gun.

So you believe our Bill of Rights should be null and void, then?

The point is, there is no need to rejoice in someone's death simply because they have different views than you. The way people are speaking of him you would think he was a rapist.

 

[virtually dead]

Oh please.
You are making yourself sound foolish.
I will not discuss this further with you.

I have my opinions, and I will continue to hold them, I don't feel they are foolish. But if you are incapable of holding discussion, then I will not hold discussion with you.
I think your views are exceedingly old-fashioned, there are many countries that have survived with gun-laws, I don't see why America cannot.

 

[virtually dead]

So you believe our Bill of Rights should be null and void, then?

The point is, there is no need to rejoice in someone's death simply because they have different views than you. The way people are speaking of him you would think he was a rapist.

No, I feel that it is right to protect the freedom of speech, press, and religion; I agree with the freedom of assembly andthe freedom to petition;
However, I do not agree with the right to keep and bear arms

And I did not at any point, rejoice in the death of Charlton Heston.

 

[Cassius]

I do not recall every saying you did. Rather, my post was directed towards the people who have.

There will always be people who take advantage of rights. There will never be a perfect society that will not. The right to bear arms can be abused, but does that mean we should take it away from everyone?

Should we not have that right because someone might decide to go on a shooting spree? In that case, should we not have the internet because someone might look up child pornography? Should we not have alcohol because someone underage might drink it?

Should we not sell kitchen knives, because someone might stab somebody with one? I recall a while ago that someone ran over and killed ten people with a car. Should we start taking a closer look at who we sell cars to, and who can get a license?

 

[vicarinatutugal]

Along with "isolated" are you also uninformed?



Well said Theo.



No, it is about individual liberties.
The right to keep and bear arms....in order to protect and defend your family, property, and home is not unnecessary.

we live in the uk.. we do not have these "rights"

 

[virtually dead]

I do not recall every saying you did. Rather, my post was directed towards the people who have.

There will always be people who take advantage of rights. There will never be a perfect society that will not. The right to bear arms can be abused, but does that mean we should take it away from everyone?

Should we not have that right because someone might decide to go on a shooting spree? In that case, should we not have the internet because someone might look up child pornography? Should we not have alcohol because someone underage might drink it?

Should we not sell kitchen knives, axes, or cars to anyone, because they might kill someone with them?

I do not think that such an easy method of taking another human being's life should be so readily available.
In answer to your examle of a shooting spree, would the victims of this shooting spree have guns in their pockets? Probably not, they cannot protect themselves. What has the right to bear arms done to help them?
I think that society would be a much better place without guns, just my opinion.

 

[chica]

I do not recall every saying you did. Rather, my post was directed towards the people who have.

There will always be people who take advantage of rights. There will never be a perfect society that will not. The right to bear arms can be abused, but does that mean we should take it away from everyone?

Should we not have that right because someone might decide to go on a shooting spree? In that case, should we not have the internet because someone might look up child pornography? Should we not have alcohol because someone underage might drink it?

Should we not sell kitchen knives, because someone might stab somebody with one? I recall a while ago that someone ran over and killed ten people with a car. Should we start taking a closer look at who we sell cars to, and who can get a license?

When you say the right to bear arms, do you mean you go to the supermarket and take your gun with you? That's a bit too much. I'm sure in most countries you have the right to posses arms (if you pass certain tests) but only police officers are allowed to carry them around. Which is enough, when you think about it.

P.S. We definitely should take a closer look at who can get a driving license. Here it's necessary to obtain clearance from a neuropsychiatrist, but sadly it's just a formality.

 

[Cassius]

I do not think that such an easy method of taking another human being's life should be so readily available.
In answer to your examle of a shooting spree, would the victims of this shooting spree have guns in their pockets? Probably not, they cannot protect themselves. What has the right to bear arms done to help them?
I think that society would be a much better place without guns, just my opinion.

There are easy methods of killing someone available. I even named a few.

Obviously, the world would be a better place without guns. I'd prefer it if no one ever had to have a gun. Let me know when that happens.

 

[vicarinatutugal]

Let me know when that happens.

hahahah! sarky...

 

[virtually dead]

There are easy methods of killing someone available. I even named a few.

Obviously, the world would be a great place without guns. I'd prefer it if no one ever had to have a gun. Let me know when that happens.

Yes, but without guns there would be one less. I don't think that anyone could argue that that would be a bad thing.

I think if people are prepared to make it happen, it could. I'm not too keen on the phrase 'had to have a gun', very few people have to have a gun.

 

[vicarinatutugal]

Interesting how American and UK people differ on gun views, or maybe its not. It is a culture difference. Its not something that would ever cross my mind wanting a gun in the house.

 

[troubleluvsme]

we live in the uk.. we do not have these "rights"

I know, and I'm sorry for you all.

I do not think that such an easy method of taking another human being's life should be so readily available.
In answer to your examle of a shooting spree, would the victims of this shooting spree have guns in their pockets? Probably not, they cannot protect themselves. What has the right to bear arms done to help them?
I think that society would be a much better place without guns, just my opinion.

Whether guns or legal or not, criminals will find ways to procure weapons. Law abiding citizens must be able to protect themselves if they wish. In many States, one who has a permit to carry a weapon, may do so. I have a permit to carry a concealed handgun. I have only used it at firing ranges, but I would not hesitate to shoot someone who became a serious threat to me.
Society would be a better place without the need for weapons.
But, it's probably not going to happen in our lifetime.

When you say the right to bear arms, do you mean you go to the supermarket and take your gun with you? That's a bit too much....

P.S. We definitely should take a closer look at who can get a driving license. Here it's necessary to obtain clearance from a neuropsychiatrist, but sadly it's just a formality.

I generally try not to shop at supermarkets where I need a gun!
But hey, anymore, you never know when you might just need it!

It probably should be more difficult for teenagers to obtain a drivers license here.

 

[Sharron Needles]

Well, you see, he was a horrible person. He made movies that people enjoyed and, to make matters worse, he found time to stand up for freedom, the rights of others, and those looked down upon by the "liberal intelligentsia". What a piece of shit. May he go to Hell. (Where hopefully I'll meet him.)

You really are quite dumb, aren't you?

 

[Cassius]

hahahah! sarky...

Not trying to be.

Yes, but without guns there would be one less. I don't think that anyone could argue that that would be a bad thing.

I think if people are prepared to make it happen, it could. I'm not too keen on the phrase 'had to have a gun', very few people have to have a gun.

A world without guns would be awesome. You know what else would be awesome? A world without cancer, rape, abuse, and poverty. That's not going to happen anytime soon.

Who, by the way, are these priveliged few?

 

[vicarinatutugal]

Not trying to be.




Who, by the way, are these priveliged few?

ok.

I should think the police.

 

[dunya]

What makes me sad is that so many civil rights have been lost in the name of "National Defence" without a great deal of debate. Both here and in the States.

I'll admit my ignorance on the full arguments for and against gun control. What I have understood is that the right to bear arms was considered neccessary at a time when there was no unified army or police force to protect the lives and livlihoods of the people living there then. Where the threat of military intervention from abroad was believeable.

There are those who would argue that the Constitiution is set in stone and should not be meddled with, and others who argue that society has changed since then, and the laws need to reflect the lives we live now.

This is also reflected in the challenges to established religions, those who take the Word as unalterable, and those who wish to make religion work for the people rather than the people work for the religion.

Is it not possible to debate these issues without assuming the person who holds a different view from you is either an idiot, or wishes to destroy, rather than hopes to keep/change for what they consider better.

 

[virtually dead]

A world without guns would be awesome. You know what else would be awesome? A world without cancer, rape, abuse, and poverty. That's not going to happen anytime soon.

Who, by the way, are these priveliged few?

It's people like you (that's sounds offensive, I'm not trying to be) who by maintaining the current state of affairs, even though they are unhappy with it, make change very difficult.

The priveliged few? Well, I'd argue that no one should have guns, but many would argue that soldiers and policemen, I was referring to public opinion.