• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Should all countries adopt a 2nd Amendment (Right To Bear Arms)?

Should all countries adopt a 2nd Amendment (Right To Bear Arms)?


  • Total voters
    39
  • Poll closed .

Colt

Well-Known Member
The problems were created by Republican policies, in support of corporate interests, and conveniently (and effectively) attributed to those opposing said policies.

They said the same thing about the civil rights movement, to promote increased suppression and segregation of black minorities.

"Democratic" and rights-based demos typically begin peacefully. If violence occurs it's usually induced by opposition attacks or overzealous policing.
The left tends to target symbols of oppression or grievances, not people. It's the right than more often resorts to violence, indiscriminate attacks, and violence against people.
Like I said, personal irresponsibility of the individual is further enabled by fellows who help them blame all their failings on others.
 

Ponder This

Well-Known Member
Japan? Canada? New Zealand? England?
And don't forget some of those countries are more armed than people realize, like Canada.
I guess you agree with me?

The right to bear arms actually has historical roots in England. This occurred after the English Crown allowed Papists to carry arms but not Protestants. The Bill of Rights of 1689 guaranteed the right of Protestants to "have Arms for their Defence".

The Bill of Rights remains in statute for Canada and New Zealand.
 

fantome profane

Anti-Woke = Anti-Justice
Premium Member
I guess you agree with me?

The right to bear arms actually has historical roots in England. This occurred after the English Crown allowed Papists to carry arms but not Protestants. The Bill of Rights of 1689 guaranteed the right of Protestants to "have Arms for their Defence".

The Bill of Rights remains in statute for Canada and New Zealand.
Does that mean the U.S. could adopt the exact same gun regulations we have in Canada without violating the 2nd amendment?
 

Copernicus

Industrial Strength Linguist
I guess you agree with me?

The right to bear arms actually has historical roots in England. This occurred after the English Crown allowed Papists to carry arms but not Protestants. The Bill of Rights of 1689 guaranteed the right of Protestants to "have Arms for their Defence".

The Bill of Rights remains in statute for Canada and New Zealand.

Does that mean the U.S. could adopt the exact same gun regulations we have in Canada without violating the 2nd amendment?

Exactly. They get these talking points from pro-gun anti-regulation sources, but they don't want the evolution of those foreign policies to influence modern gun control policy in the US. Switzerland is another favorite foreign model, because they have a citizen militia that is close to the concept of militias that existed in the states at the end of the 18th century. However, gun manufacturers and their enablers don't want the US to have the same restrictions on gun ownership and possession that exist in modern Switzerland. The US does not represent a model of gun rights policies that other countries envy and want to emulate. Quite the opposite. The US stands as a cautionary tale of what can happen to a country that strives to remove regulations and restrictions on private gun ownership. An international embarrassment.
 

Aupmanyav

Be your own guru
india does not believe in that. personal licence is given for a valid reason and hunting is absolutely prohibited even if lions, tigers, leopards roam on your street. you need to inform the forest office. they will come, capture the animal and relocate it.

leopard_mumbai_steve-winter_-national-geographic.jpg
1702042710116.jpeg
1702042268737.jpeg
 

Bthoth

*banned*
india does not believe in that. personal licence is given for a valid reason and hunting is absolutely prohibited even if lions, tigers, leopards roam on your street. you need to inform the forest office. they will come, capture the animal and relocate it.

leopard_mumbai_steve-winter_-national-geographic.jpg
View attachment 85450 View attachment 85449
there's my little monkey bear. I left the slider open and she got out again.

Can someone bring my little monkey home?

I miss her little paws waking me up in the morning.
 

Twilight Hue

Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
Should all countries adopt a 2nd Amendment (Right To Bear Arms)?
Given what had happened to Ukraine I would say it's pretty obvious why people need personal arms.

Ukraine had some fairly stringent and regulated gun laws but the Russian invasion changed a lot of that since.

Wiki quote....

On February 23, 2022,immediately before the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine and a declaration of a state of emergency the Ukrainian parliament approved a law which gives citizens the right to carry weapons outside their homes for the purpose of self defense.[5][6][7]
 
Top