Right. The same majority that now has control of both the House and Senate, as well as the Presidency. Who, BTW, will likely be naming several SC justices during his tenure.

:thumb: :thumb: :thumb:

 

Hence the concern of gun owners.

Look you know I am on your side on most of this but a full blooded Rottweiler or similarly strong dog in protective mode could just as easily tear out the throat of a drug crazed fool faster than he could stab it. Of course at the same time he could stab it as fast. It is a 50/50 thing there, much like making sure you were conscious enough to grab your gun and make sure it was loaded in time to stop an intruder. It is a gamble, not a guarantee either way.

 

 

Exactly!

Look you know I am on your side on most of this but a full blooded Rottweiler or similarly strong dog in protective mode could just as easily tear out the throat of a drug crazed fool faster than he could stab it. Of course at the same time he could stab it as fast. It is a 50/50 thing there, much like making sure you were conscious enough to grab your gun and make sure it was loaded in time to stop an intruder. It is a gamble, not a guarantee either way.

And if there a re two or more thugs?

 

I know you’re on my side here, but I've seen plenty of stories where dog owners thought that way, sadly it came out different.

Exactly!

Lucky isn't going to be able to always save you, RM. A gun is a better defense, but it's your right to do it your way. :thumb:

Yet, I've lived 42 years, and never had a violent crime committed against me by a stranger.

Doesn't mean it can't happen.

And if there a re two or more thugs?

 

I know you’re on my side here, but I've seen plenty of stories where dog owners thought that way, sadly it came out different.

 

Well that wasn't part of the initial equation. You're exact words were:

 

A dog isn't going to stop a drug crazed fool, a .357 will.

 

 

If it is A (i.e. singular) drug crazed fool a guard dog that is well suited to BE a guard dog, not a high strung yappy thing that loves to bark but a dog that knows to protect, is just as likely to protect me as a gun would. That said, I have my gun too just in case. I'd rather be able to take care of it than worry about my dog getting hurt.

Lucky isn't going to be able to always save you, RM. A gun is a better defense, but it's your right to do it your way. :thumb:

 

 

Nothing against Lucky, but having met the dog he would be pretty easily turned aside if someone wanted to break in. All he has is bark, he has no stopping power.

Nothing against Lucky, but having met the dog he would be pretty easily turned aside if someone wanted to break in. All he has is bark, he has no stopping power.

 

 

I would say there is a greater chance that some miscreant would be turned away from the door based on Lucky's bark, than on the off-chance that I might have a gun.

I would say there is a greater chance that some miscreant would be turned away from the door based on Lucky's bark, than on the off-chance that I might have a gun.

 

Fair enough

Right. The same majority that now has control of both the House and Senate, as well as the Presidency. Who, BTW, will likely be naming several SC justices during his tenure.

 

If I'm not mistaken a Constitutional Amendment has to be ratified by the individual state governments doesn't it? That's a different hassle than getting the Congressmen to vote on it.

 

I also would state that many would say that "the will of the majority should rule" are many who decry this kind of intrusion on his/her rights. Where is majority rule in that?

 

My point is that it is so difficult to pass a Constitutional change that it would not get enough support from the various states.

I can agree with that assessment. However some things are worth the effort and I believe that legal and rightful gun ownership is one of those things. I recall the cases you are speaking of but were those decisions violations of the Bill of Rights in some way or form?

I am thinking specifically of regulations that render coal reserves not "minable and merchantable" where the owner had clear contractual rights to mine underground coal reserves but the government restricts recovery rates without compensation to the owner of the mining rights.

 

In addition to the Fifth Amendment, Article I and the Fourteenth Amendment also apply.

 

Article 1, Section 10: No state shall enter into any treaty, alliance, or confederation; grant letters of marque and reprisal; coin money; emit bills of credit; make anything but gold and silver coin a tender in payment of debts; pass any bill of attainder, ex post facto law, or law impairing the obligation of contracts, or grant any title of nobility.

 

Fifth Amendment: No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

 

Fourteenth Amendment, Section 1: Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

You say that gun ownership is worth the effort but would you feel the same way if ammunition was taxed at $10 a round and gun dealers required to sell ammunition in containers containing no fewer than 500 rounds? What if the government required manufacturers to tag each round by including particles in each round of a box bearing a microscopic serial number, thereby making the ammunition prohibitively expensive? Where is the line where restrictions on a right render it worthless?

I would say there is a greater chance that some miscreant would be turned away from the door based on Lucky's bark, than on the off-chance that I might have a gun.

If a would-be intruder is deterred by a dog's bark, do you not think that the prospect of facing an armed gun owner - alarmed at the barking of her loyal pet - enters into the decision?

Yet, I've lived 42 years, and never had a violent crime committed against me by a stranger.

Did you not just say a few posts ago that your home was broken into? What if you had been home? Noboby likes to think that something could happen to them but the fact is bad things happen. The point isn't to have the gun because something is going to happen, you have it just in case it does happen. I don't wear my seat belt because I know I am going to be in a wreck, I wear it in case I am in a wreck.

If I'm not mistaken a Constitutional Amendment has to be ratified by the individual state governments doesn't it? That's a different hassle than getting the Congressmen to vote on it.

 

I also would state that many would say that "the will of the majority should rule" are many who decry this kind of intrusion on his/her rights. Where is majority rule in that?

 

My point is that it is so difficult to pass a Constitutional change that it would not get enough support from the various states.

If he keeps his campaign promise, nearly all restrictions on abortion will soon be removed in every state and no amendment will be required. Liberals know that they can best advance their agenda by packing the courts with like-minded judges not through the amendment process. They will use the same tactics that they have used to advance other causes that the majority of Americans oppose.

Did you not just say a few posts ago that your home was broken into? What if you had been home? Noboby likes to think that something could happen to them but the fact is bad things happen. The point isn't to have the gun because something is going to happen, you have it just in case it does happen. I don't wear my seat belt because I know I am going to be in a wreck, I wear it in case I am in a wreck.

 

 

I was at home, with my dog. It was about 11:30pm, and I'd just gone to bed.