Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 StyleXHobby wrote:

 LordofHats wrote:

 Spacemanvic wrote:


Refresh my memory, Prohibition was part of which of the 10 Amendments that make up the Bill of Rights?

The sheer fact that you miss than an amendment is an alteration to the Constitution, including Prohibition which was a political whim (just a famous example among many), says it all. There's nothing within the words of the Constitution that prevents congress from passing an amendment revoking another amendment including the first 10. All it takes is political will (which is unlikely to ever happen) but the Constitution is not an omnipotent deity that watches us from on high to make sure we're all happy and safe.

Where did you go to school, my friend?

Somewhere that taught civics.

 LordofHats wrote:

 StyleXHobby wrote:

 LordofHats wrote:

 Spacemanvic wrote:


Refresh my memory, Prohibition was part of which of the 10 Amendments that make up the Bill of Rights?

The sheer fact that you miss than an amendment is an alteration to the Constitution, including Prohibition which was a political whim (just a famous example among many), says it all. There's nothing within the words of the Constitution that prevents congress from passing an amendment revoking another amendment including the first 10. All it takes is political will (which is unlikely to ever happen) but the Constitution is not an omnipotent deity that watches us from on high to make sure we're all happy and safe.

Where did you go to school, my friend?

Somewhere that taught civics.

Respectable.

 Alfndrate wrote:

 Spacemanvic wrote:
Refresh my memory, Prohibition was part of which of the 10 Amendments that make up the Bill of Rights?

They're talking about the US Constitution as a whole, not a singular part of the document. The Constitution can be amended, and has been amended in the past.

An Amendment can be introduced to attempt to supersede an existing Amendment, that's true. It'll take 2/3rds of the House to do it. But in regards to the Second Amendment, it'll be a damned fool who does it and a sorry soul who tries to enforce it in this country. The Bill of Rights have never been Amended.

 Spacemanvic wrote:

 Alfndrate wrote:

 Spacemanvic wrote:
Refresh my memory, Prohibition was part of which of the 10 Amendments that make up the Bill of Rights?

They're talking about the US Constitution as a whole, not a singular part of the document. The Constitution can be amended, and has been amended in the past.

An Amendment can be introduced to attempt to supersede an existing Amendment, that's true. It'll take 2/3rds of the House to do it. But in regards to the Second Amendment, it'll be a damned fool who does it and a sorry soul who tries to enforce it in this country. The Bill of Rights have never been Amended.

...and probably never will be so long as there is the 2nd?

I've heard stories of blind people showing up to qualify for their carry permit who were so blind a friend had to physically point their body at the target, but who knows if those are real.

If they're at the "still pretty blurry, but they can make out a person" level blind, I might be ok with it. They can see their target well enough to point the pistol in the right direction. What I would be worried about though is them being able to determine when deadly force is necessary (for example, is the guy holding a knife, or just a cell phone) and also what's behind their target, such as a persons house or even possibly shooting across a street.

For a 100% blind person, I'll admit that I would be uncomfortable with them carrying, if only for the fact that they might hit an innocent person by accident. The attacker would have to be pretty much right in front of them to guarantee a hit. I sympathize with blind individuals wanting to be treated as normal people, but there are just some things you have to accept you can't do. A guy who is paralyzed from the neck down shouldn't be climbing mount Everest. A pregnant woman shouldn't ride roller coasters or smoke. And a guy who can't see the hand in front of his face probably shouldn't be wielding a weapon where a key skill in using it involves careful aim

 StyleXHobby wrote:

 Spacemanvic wrote:

 Alfndrate wrote:

 Spacemanvic wrote:
Refresh my memory, Prohibition was part of which of the 10 Amendments that make up the Bill of Rights?

They're talking about the US Constitution as a whole, not a singular part of the document. The Constitution can be amended, and has been amended in the past.

An Amendment can be introduced to attempt to supersede an existing Amendment, that's true. It'll take 2/3rds of the House to do it. But in regards to the Second Amendment, it'll be a damned fool who does it and a sorry soul who tries to enforce it in this country. The Bill of Rights have never been Amended.

...and probably never will be so long as there is the 2nd?

The power of force.

 easysauce wrote:
we all have the inalienable right to...
the only one who can alienate it is ourselves.

Kind of indicates that there is no such thing as an inalienable right if those rights can be taken away...

 SilverMK2 wrote:

 easysauce wrote:
we all have the inalienable right to...
the only one who can alienate it is ourselves.

Kind of indicates that there is no such thing as an inalienable right if those rights can be taken away...

"To be taken away" means you have them in the first place. A right exercised is a right retained.

 Spacemanvic wrote:
The power of force.

A truely utopian society where the stong, or at least the more willing to commit violence, rule everyone else.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Spacemanvic wrote:
"To be taken away" means you have them in the first place. A right exercised is a right retained.

And a right taken away is not inalienable.

It would be funny to see a blind person trying to shoot someone.

 SilverMK2 wrote:

 Spacemanvic wrote:
The power of force.

A truely utopian society where the stong, or at least the more willing to commit violence, rule everyone else.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Spacemanvic wrote:
"To be taken away" means you have them in the first place. A right exercised is a right retained.

And a right taken away is not inalienable.

Forget I even started this "conversation" with you.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 sing your life wrote:
It would be funny to see a blind person trying to shoot someone.

Hell no! I wouldnt want to be anywhere near there LOL.

 Spacemanvic wrote:
Forget I even started this "conversation" with you.

Well, I feel like I have been banging my head against a wall since it started, so you never know

But if you ever want to know what the word "inalienable" actually means, google is only a click away.

 SilverMK2 wrote:

 Spacemanvic wrote:
Forget I even started this "conversation" with you.

Well, I feel like I have been banging my head against a wall since it started, so you never know

But if you ever want to know what the word "inalienable" actually means, google is only a click away.

LIES!

I also have to type!

 Gentleman_Jellyfish wrote:

 SilverMK2 wrote:

 Spacemanvic wrote:
Forget I even started this "conversation" with you.

Well, I feel like I have been banging my head against a wall since it started, so you never know

But if you ever want to know what the word "inalienable" actually means, google is only a click away.

LIES!

I also have to type!

Pft

 Spacemanvic wrote:


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 sing your life wrote:
It would be funny to see a blind person trying to shoot someone.

Hell no! I wouldnt want to be anywhere near there LOL.

A recording would be mostly safe [as long as the camera wasn't hit]

A friend of mine plays cricket with a guy who's legally blind. He's a really good bowler, relative to the grade of cricket they play, but he pretty much judges where he has to bowl by where the white blurry shape is. He can't bat, obviously, and so his side just declares when he's the only one left to bat.

I guess I could see him being effective enough with a gun, aiming for the blurry man shaped object. He'd be a fair chance of hitting any bystanders, but then so is just about everyone when they pull out a gun.

 LordofHats wrote:
The sheer fact that you miss than an amendment is an alteration to the Constitution, including Prohibition which was a political whim (just a famous example among many), says it all. There's nothing within the words of the Constitution that prevents congress from passing an amendment revoking another amendment including the first 10. All it takes is political will (which is unlikely to ever happen) but the Constitution is not an omnipotent deity that watches us from on high to make sure we're all happy and safe.

Yep.

"The relative freedom which we enjoy depends of public opinion. The law is no protection. Governments make laws, but whether they are carried out, and how the police behave, depends on the general temper in the country. If large numbers of people are interested in freedom of speech, there will be freedom of speech, even if the law forbids it; if public opinion is sluggish, inconvenient minorities will be persecuted, even if laws exist to protect them."

George Orwell, printed in the Tribune on 7th December 1945.

 hotsauceman1 wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
Just because they might not shoot doesn't mean they wont. And I think this is just like a drivers license, you nee t see to work a gun just like a car.

Except of course, every human has an inalienable right to self defense. Drive a car, not so much.

But remember boys and girls, nobody walks in LA!

What is more important? The right of society or the right of individuals?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also, Maybe my reluctance is because i think of a nice old grannie who is blind ans using a walker wielding a dessert eagle when i think of blind people with guns

Society doesn't have Rights. Individuals do.

And remember, legally blind doesn't mean you are totally blind. You are just blind enough to where you can't operate a vehicle. You could still be able to read and walk around without any aids.

I remember reading somewhere that most "blind" people aren't actually totally blind, but rather only legally blind. They still can see something, even if its only light sources.


And in the event of a night time home invasion, a blind person might be better suited to "seeing" around the house than a normal sighted person. They aren't inhibited by the darkness and their other senses are much sharper to compensate.

They aren't inhibited by the darkness and their other senses are much sharper to compensate.

I thought that only happened when you were blinded by a radioactive substance from a passing vehicle. Is this actually a thing?

The few blind people I've met had pretty sharp hearing.

 Grey Templar wrote:
The few blind people I've met had pretty sharp hearing.

I meant along the lines of scientific experiments and what not rather than anecdotal evidence. Its probably out there, I'm flicking through my uni library now looking for it, I'm actually keen to find out. And not (only) trying to be a smartass

Sure give Gun permits for Blind people..just make the restriction only for shotguns with laser sights..oh and a helper monkey to assist in aiming...maybe that will curb people attacking the blind...(the laser is just for coolness, and for the monkey, they respond well to bright lights.)

Well after watching Blind Fury (the film with Rutger Hauer), surely only good can come from this?

The few blind people I've met had pretty sharp hearing.

admit it.. you were thinking of that scene from The Bodyguard?

Well you don't need eyes to stick a gun into a man's stomach and pull the trigger. But at the same time... what's to stop the blind person from just shooting in the direction of their attacker? I could go both ways on this one.

I've been looking around and found that their sense of smell and ability to recognise things through touch are improved to an extent, but I haven't come across sound yet. So maybe if the bad guys smell/feel different?

 sebster wrote:
A friend of mine plays cricket with a guy who's legally blind. He's a really good bowler, relative to the grade of cricket they play, but he pretty much judges where he has to bowl by where the white blurry shape is. He can't bat, obviously, and so his side just declares when he's the only one left to bat..

This space reserved for a joke about the Ashes

 motyak wrote:
I've been looking around and found that their sense of smell and ability to recognise things through touch are improved to an extent, but I haven't come across sound yet. So maybe if the bad guys smell/feel different?

Youtube the video on the guy that teaches the blind to use Echo Location. He can ride a bike down the street and is 100% blind. As in his eyes do not work. Its pretty impressive

Ashes? Can't leave us non knowing Cricket sport whatever hanging like that Red

No one and I mean no one. In all the gun threads we had never even considered or mention this. I'm afraid to Google for recent court challenges denying the Blind to purchase and own weapons incase I jinx it. Only time I ever had to deal with a legally blind person was when one of my soldiers got his ass beat by one. The guy was whatever belt before black and whatever martial arts that involved grappling/keeping the opponent close.

 KingCracker wrote:

 motyak wrote:
I've been looking around and found that their sense of smell and ability to recognise things through touch are improved to an extent, but I haven't come across sound yet. So maybe if the bad guys smell/feel different?

Youtube the video on the guy that teaches the blind to use Echo Location. He can ride a bike down the street and is 100% blind. As in his eyes do not work. Its pretty impressive

Oh I'm not doubting that some do, I mean that as a general population they don't, at least that I can find.

 sebster wrote:
"The relative freedom which we enjoy depends of public opinion. The law is no protection. Governments make laws, but whether they are carried out, and how the police behave, depends on the general temper in the country. If large numbers of people are interested in freedom of speech, there will be freedom of speech, even if the law forbids it; if public opinion is sluggish, inconvenient minorities will be persecuted, even if laws exist to protect them."

Something, something, Jim Crow law.

Good place for this if it hasn't been posted already:


http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=l95IUUNnpjg

Old time western with Ringo called "Blindman".