Anyone 'carry' when riding?

Ducati Forum

Help Support Ducati Forum:

It's intriguing to me that Americans are usually the ones who are accused of "telling other countries" what to do/should/ or not, but it seems like others have a lot of opinions to what USA should/should not do from non-Americans.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted by Fisher1199R
hahaha i love the american way of thinking more guns that'll fix it lol

Not this American!
 
How gratifying will it be when this forum garners international attention for solving the nation's (maybe world's?) gun violence problem? I can see it now "..and now to Anderson for this breaking story. Apparently a niche motorcycle community of Ducati owners has finally solved a decades old vexing issue..."

Yeah, not gonna happen. I'm done with this thread. I'll go read more about the AR exhaust. :)
 
MUNDMAN said:
Originally Posted by Fisher1199R
hahaha i love the american way of thinking more guns that'll fix it lol

Not this American!
Click to expand...

Not this American either. It's ludicrous to posit that the problem with guns is that there's not enough of them.

It's the bizarre logic indulged in by those with that particular fetish. Like crack addicts, no price is too high or reasoning too bizarre to keep the gun fondlers from their fetish.
 
Certainly not the right place for this b/c it is highly political but my opinion of the NRA wanting more guns is because of the gun industry. Guess what? They want to sell more guns and I understand that. Their own members want background checks and........well enough said. This is my opinion and in no way do I want to intefere with your 2nd amendment rights.
 
MUNDMAN said:
Certainly not the right place for this b/c it is highly political but my opinion of the NRA wanting more guns is because of the gun industry. Guess what? They want to sell more guns and I understand that. Their own members want background checks and........well enough said. This is my opinion and in no way do I want to intefere with your 2nd amendment rights.
Click to expand...


NOT THIS LIFE NRA Member. I do not believe in ANY background checks at all. Criminals and the insane are not going to procure their firearms legitimately in the first place, why inconvenience legitimate purchasers any further...

The 2A is the only amendment that says SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED.

:cool:
 
So you think that 1 stranger selling a firearm to another stranger and there should be no background check. And lets get rid of speed limits b/c some people still speed.
P.S.
As passed by the Congress:

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
As ratified by the States and authenticated by Thomas Jefferson, Secretary of State:

A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed

The key words here are "WELL REGULATED"
 
MUNDMAN said:
So you think that 1 stranger selling a firearm to another stranger and there should be no background check. And lets get rid of speed limits b/c some people still speed.
P.S.
As passed by the Congress:

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
As ratified by the States and authenticated by Thomas Jefferson, Secretary of State:

A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed

The key words here are "WELL REGULATED"
Click to expand...

Look up the usage of "regulated" in the 18th century. It does not mean what you think it does. In this case, it means "the same, or similar"

I suppose next you are going to say that only the Militia (the National guard or army) should be able to bear arms, because it is used as a preface to the Amendment?

Wordsmithing or verbicide will not / can not change the intent of the 2A.

I have bought, and sold MANY firearms with no background check, as private sale. I will continue to do so, as it is not a right infringed upon in my home state.

Some people fear their own liberty and freedom. Shameful.
 
Last edited:
Scary times we live in -- the sheeple now crave the Nanny State aka USSA at the expense of their liberty, which they could give a .... about as long as they're "taken care of".

Remember this, equality and welfare never precede liberty; rather, liberty must always come first and from there equality and welfare may derive organically vs. what he have now in the USSA which is a synthetic anti-capitilist centrally planned big gov neo-socialist more at neo-fascist corporatacracy. As such, the "state" would love to strip everyone of their liberties and amendments, not limited to 2A.

(edit: most people do not remember or know that one of the first things Hitler did when he came to power was "regulate" guns very aggressively. extrapolate accordingly.)

(edit 2: background checks do absolutely nothing to prevent criminals, sociopaths and pharmaceutically altered [look at recent stats on how many "shooters" of late were on plethora of Big Pharma cocktails] individuals from obtaining weapons.)

(edit 3: look up Operation Fast & Furious -- an operation by the USSA GOV!)

(edit 4: this individual once told me that he was scared of guns particularly because he had young children in his home! I bit my tongue bc the response to that kind of nonsense is, "so you're scared of yourself and your ability to lock the guns and hide them properly? Which means you don't trust your very own parenting skills and then some..." Amazing times we live in!)

mdracer76 said:
Look up the usage of "regulated" in the 18th century. It does not mean what you think it does. In this case, it means "the same, or similar"

I suppose next you are going to say that only the Militia (the National guard or army) should be able to bear arms, because it is used as a preface to the Amendment?

Wordsmithing or verbicide will not / can not change the intent of the 2A.

I have bought, and sold MANY firearms with no background check, as private sale. I will continue to do so, as it is not a right infringed upon in my home state.

Some people fear their own liberty and freedom. Shameful.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
VAST said:
Scary times we live in -- the sheeple now crave the Nanny State aka USSA at the expense of their liberty, which they could give a .... about as long as they're "taken care of".

Remember this, equality and welfare never precede liberty; rather, liberty must always come first and from there equality and welfare may derive organically vs. what he have now in the USSA which is a synthetic anti-capitilist centrally planned big gov neo-socialist more at neo-fascist corporatacracy. As such, the "state" would love to strip everyone of their liberties and amendments, not limited to 2A.

(edit: most people do not remember or know that one of the first things Hitler did when he came to power was "regulate" guns very aggressively. extrapolate accordingly.)

(edit 2: background checks do absolutely nothing to prevent criminals, sociopaths and pharmaceutically altered [look at recent stats on how many "shooters" of late were on plethora of Big Pharma cocktails] individuals from obtaining weapons.)

(edit 3: look up Operation Fast & Furious -- an operation by the USSA GOV!)

(edit 4: this one individual once told me that he was scared of guns particularly because he had young children in his home! I bit my tongue bc the response to that kind of nonsense is, "so you're scared of yourself and your ability to lock the guns and hide them properly? Which means you don't trust your very own parenting skills and then some..." Amazing times we live in!)
Click to expand...

As soon as you play the Hitler card you lose. Now on to using the "ignore" feature for a couple of baggers. :D
 
This ignore feature really works! Sanity restored! Now on to read more about the 3-year-old Florida child that just shot himself. No doubt the NRA will say the child should have owned his own gun to protect himself from the oh never mind I can't follow their word salad logic anyway.
 
I will say upfront that I am not American, but after 19 years in this country I understand that is part of the american culture, it is a violent society, cities are dangerous etc and that is the way it is. Fine. I also agree that background checks wont solve the problem. Still, why opposing backgrounds checks, independently of reducing crime or not? doesnt it make sense to limit who gets access to a object specifically designed to kill? you cite the 2nd but I think your interpretation is too drastic.Everyone should have the right to drive their car, but you forbid drunk driving. But you wouldnt forbid a drunken psycopath to carry a gun. Or may be I dont know th elaw enough.
I am not trying to tell anyone what to do or hurt any sensitivities and I know for a fact that my arguments are not going to change anyone's mind, I am just trying to understand your point of view.
 
the reasons for regulation are at best disingenuous and the car analogy not applicable for too many obvious reasons...

do you realize that deaths by guns in the USSA is less than 1% of auto accidents or far less likely than having basic domestic accident. when a 4 year old cuts themselves you may want to consider "regulating" knives and scissors too; and boxcutters too since they are weapons of terrorists. oh and while we're at it, let's regulate pressure cookers, small metal objects and....Mahalo!

while my expectations of my fellow man's intelligence are quite low, I am assuming that majority here can read charts, right? I mean just based on dyno graph experience you all should be able to conclude from below* without scintilla of doubt that guns are not a serious issue and that this entire debate is about Gov trying to strip you of your liberty.



accidents_fatal-full.png


accidents_nonfatal-full.png


dc-full.png


england-full.png


chicago-full.png


chicago_handguns-full.png


*note: gun related stats have gotten "safer" since 2007:


GOT DRONE?



pedrin said:
I will say upfront that I am not American, but after 19 years in this country I understand that is part of the american culture, it is a violent society, cities are dangerous etc and that is the way it is. Fine. I also agree that background checks wont solve the problem. Still, why opposing backgrounds checks, independently of reducing crime or not? doesnt it make sense to limit who gets access to a object specifically designed to kill? you cite the 2nd but I think your interpretation is too drastic.Everyone should have the right to drive their car, but you forbid drunk driving. But you wouldnt forbid a drunken psycopath to carry a gun. Or may be I dont know th elaw enough.
I am not trying to tell anyone what to do or hurt any sensitivities and I know for a fact that my arguments are not going to change anyone's mind, I am just trying to understand your point of view.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
AlohaMark said:
This ignore feature really works! Sanity restored! Now on to read more about the 3-year-old Florida child that just shot himself. No doubt the NRA will say the child should have owned his own gun to protect himself from the oh never mind I can't follow their word salad logic anyway.
Click to expand...

A child shooting themselves is not a failure of the NRA, it is a failure in parenting.
 
pedrin said:
I will say upfront that I am not American, but after 19 years in this country I understand that is part of the american culture, it is a violent society, cities are dangerous etc and that is the way it is. Fine. I also agree that background checks wont solve the problem. Still, why opposing backgrounds checks, independently of reducing crime or not? doesnt it make sense to limit who gets access to a object specifically designed to kill? you cite the 2nd but I think your interpretation is too drastic.Everyone should have the right to drive their car, but you forbid drunk driving. But you wouldnt forbid a drunken psycopath to carry a gun. Or may be I dont know th elaw enough.
I am not trying to tell anyone what to do or hurt any sensitivities and I know for a fact that my arguments are not going to change anyone's mind, I am just trying to understand your point of view.
Click to expand...

Statistics clearly show that background checks are not stopping criminals,or the insane, from acquiring firearms. In 2010, there were over 76,000 initial denials, but only 44 of those were deemed worthy for prosecution and only 13 individuals were convicted.

The Constitution does not list "Driving a car". Last time I checked Driving is a Privilege that can be revoked.

Some states do prohibit the carrying of arms while intoxicated. I don't agree with the law personally. I think that is someone is intoxicated, and handling a firearm in an unsafe manner, then either another armed citizen, or a police officer will quickly put that unsafe situation to resolution with their own firearm.
 
Funny to read some comments for sure.

When the Bomb went off in Boston...we say, "the Bomber!!!" and not he BOMB, but when some ..... shoots people, "outlaw the GUNS!!!" I thought that was funny.

For Americans, we know that our country is founded on compromises. Founding fathers of country had much differences and opinions. So, it is ok to have opinions and different view, not just this topic, but any others as well.

Having said that, our right to own "arms" is to protect ourselves against the Federal Government if Federal Government turned into an government we "the people" no longer can follow...example would be England, back then.

Then we can say, well...do we need assault rifle? well, the point was to defend ourselves, which could be a tyrant government or other hostile people that are trying to harm you/property/family etc. So that can be matter of debate and differences of opinions.

I am 100% to having to have the right own guns but things like background check, mental checks, machine guns and etc, we the "people" should comprise and come to best solution for us all.
 
unfortunately, the Federal Gov has already mutated into one that "we the people" can no longer trust nor allow to represent us. the issue is that the sheeple are too busy watching Dancing With The Stars and getting bought out by big gov (ebt cards record use, etc.).

or maybe as collective we deserve it all - the sheeple win...

but if one can't back up their arguments with facts and data, then said person is defending merely feelings and opinions. the above data will make every anti-gun individual up in here feel even more irrational, knowingly or not, and their positions out of line and out of touch with reality; as such they will attack irrationally and/or ignore irrationally the facts and data and have scant concrete legit evidence of their own. it's almost impossible to deal with irrational opinions and feelings. we are screwed.

youngR said:
Funny to read some comments for sure.

When the Bomb went off in Boston...we say, "the Bomber!!!" and not he BOMB, but when some ..... shoots people, "outlaw the GUNS!!!" I thought that was funny.

For Americans, we know that our country is founded on compromises. Founding fathers of country had much differences and opinions. So, it is ok to have opinions and different view, not just this topic, but any others as well.

Having said that, our right to own "arms" is to protect ourselves against the Federal Government if Federal Government turned into an government we "the people" no longer can follow...example would be England, back then.

Then we can say, well...do we need assault rifle? well, the point was to defend ourselves, which could be a tyrant government or other hostile people that are trying to harm you/property/family etc. So that can be matter of debate and differences of opinions.

I am 100% to having to have the right own guns but things like background check, mental checks, machine guns and etc, we the "people" should comprise and come to best solution for us all.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
VAST said:
unfortunately, the Federal Gov has already mutated into one that "we the people" can no longer trust nor allow to represent us. the issue is that the sheeple are too busy watching Dancing With The Stars and getting bought out by big gov (ebt cards record use, etc.).

or maybe as collective we deserve it all - the sheeple win...
Click to expand...

:D

That is a another debate, but just know that I am not a fan of this administration...:rolleyes:
 

Similar threads

B
1199 Misfiring badly when getting to normal temps
Replies
9
Views
225
Seth Vo
Seth Vo
V
2023 Ducati Panigale V4 DTC error (P0112)
Replies
1
Views
244
SuperDomestique
SuperDomestique
J
No indicators / horn - Wiring headaches and help
Replies
1
Views
143
bp_SFV4
bp_SFV4
K
  • Locked
SOLD! DUCATI OGIO REDLINE B1 BACKPACK (981040452)
Replies
4
Views
793
keknittle
K
nightrider899
HELP NEEDED - Issues with Gear Shifting after Clutch Switch Relocation
Replies
9
Views
804
nightrider899
nightrider899

Register CTA

Register on Ducati Forum! This sidebar will go away, and you will see fewer ads.

Recent Discussions

Back
Top