Plastic Guns, does the 2nd Amendment apply?

[ian_co]

I recently learned of a past vote where Dick Cheney voted no against the banning of plastic guns. These plastic guns are not toy guns but can be lethal and more importantly they are undetectable by metal detectors.

Do you think this is justified?

I personally find this excessive and that there is more than an intention of self-defense with such weapons.

[evilfunnystuff]

Shall not be infringed

[pcosmar]

First, Why should they be banned?

And second, NAME ONE.

[LedHed]

Maybe it's time to consider an amendment which clarifies the ambiguously and poorly worded 2nd amendment. Madison had originally incorporated language which more succinctly described the recognition of the right to bear arms by the individual than was finally accepted by ratification into the final version of the 2nd amendment. The constitution remains a dynamic, living document, because the framers realized that it would have to be changed from time to time to keep pace with our evolving nation and its culture. This is why they wisely built provisions into it which allow us as a people to make amendments to it. Of course, any amendment would have to be ratified prior to it being incorporated, and that's become a long, long process in itself.

[LedHed]

First, Why should they be banned?

And second, NAME ONE.

"Name one" what?

[evilfunnystuff]

"Name one" what?

probly

plastic guns ... lethal ... undetectable by metal detectors.

[pcosmar]

probly

Exactly.
Name one plastic gun that is undetectable. please include the ammo that is undetectable as well.

Freakin' stupid shit

[LedHed]

Exactly.
Name one plastic gun that is undetectable. please include the ammo that is undetectable as well.

Freakin' stupid shit

Especially with back scatter detectors, strip searching, and white color screen printing in use.

[muzzled dogg]

No but the 10th does in most cases

[muzzled dogg]

Lol oh oops I thought u meant toy guns

[Icymudpuppy]

People must think that one used by John Malkovich in the movie "In the Line of Fire" was real.

[ian_co]

i'm too lazy to go find an exact model of a lethal plastic gun but i think its irrelevant either way. Your opinion on undetectable guns isn't dependent on whether or not they exist, the point is i'm asking about how you would react to such weapons.

lets just say this is a "what if" question, where there are guns being produced made out of plastic which are undetectable by metal detectors and have lethal bullets, would the second amendment apply?

well if you guys want to know where this question of plastic guns came from, go here:

http://www.ontheissues.org/celeb/Dick_Cheney_Gun_Control.htm

[oyarde]

Exactly.
Name one plastic gun that is undetectable. please include the ammo that is undetectable as well.

Freakin' stupid shit

Correct , that would require caseless ammo with a non metallic bullet . I have only seen an experimental caseless ammo once and it was test fired in a metallic weapon.

[oyarde]

Shall not be infringed

Yes

[pcosmar]

i'm too lazy to go find an exact model of a lethal plastic gun but i think its irrelevant either way. Your opinion on undetectable guns isn't dependent on whether or not they exist, the point is i'm asking about how you would react to such weapons.

lets just say this is a "what if" question, where there are guns being produced made out of plastic which are undetectable by metal detectors and have lethal bullets, would the second amendment apply?

well if you guys want to know where this question of plastic guns came from, go here:

http://www.ontheissues.org/celeb/Dick_Cheney_Gun_Control.htm

Likely voted against it because it is a stupid law to ban something that does not exist.

Same issue with the so called Cop Killer Bullets.
It is a fabricated threat.

As far as the "what if"
So What? or maybe "I want one".

Question for you. Why would the 2nd Amendment NOT apply?

[ian_co]

Likely voted against it because it is a stupid law to ban something that does not exist.

Same issue with the so called Cop Killer Bullets.
It is a fabricated threat.

As far as the "what if"
So What? or maybe "I want one".

Question for you. Why would the 2nd Amendment NOT apply?

I would assume it's because a plastic gun holds implications past self-defense. If you had a plastic gun in your own home it doesn't make much of a difference whether it be metal or plastic as the government does not place metal detectors in your home. However, if you go to a mall which is privately owned and the company which owns the mall wants to protect it's visitors from mentally unstable people and installs metal detectors, the availability of plastic guns would allow for these kinds of individuals to get across such obstacles and cause damage to the public and probably themselves shortly after.

I should revise my original post and clarify that I am not trying to sway people to say plastic guns should be illegal but rather prove to me that it is my opinion that should be swayed.

Is there something wrong with what if questions? We can't limit questions to libertarianism solely on reality today, if we ask questions on things that may not even exist for the next generation, we are probing deeper thought in understanding our ideology. Things do not have to exist for us question. Take this plastic gun thread for example, it doesn't matter in my opinion whether or not they exist, the point is that people will use logic and reasoning from a libertarian perspective to solve and debate it and thats the important thing is it not?

[oyarde]

I would assume it's because a plastic gun holds implications past self-defense. If you had a plastic gun in your own home it doesn't make much of a difference whether it be metal or plastic as the government does not place metal detectors in your home. However, if you go to a mall which is privately owned and the company which owns the mall wants to protect it's visitors from mentally unstable people and installs metal detectors, the availability of plastic guns would allow for these kinds of individuals to get across such obstacles and cause damage to the public and probably themselves shortly after.

I should revise my original post and clarify that I am not trying to sway people to say plastic guns should be illegal but rather prove to me that it is my opinion that should be swayed.

Is there something wrong with what if questions? We can't limit questions to libertarianism solely on reality today, if we ask questions on things that may not even exist for the next generation, we are probing deeper thought in understanding our ideology. Things do not have to exist for us question. Take this plastic gun thread for example, it doesn't matter in my opinion whether or not they exist, the point is that people will use logic and reasoning from a libertarian perspective to solve and debate it and thats the important thing is it not?

I once carried a plastic dagger made from Zytel that would puncture plywood or a wooden door . It was not detectable by a metal detector . That was a long time ago . I bought it out of a catalog .

[aGameOfThrones]

Wait till someone invents an invisible gun.

[pcosmar]

I would assume it's because a plastic gun holds implications past self-defense.

It would have self defense applications if other and better arms were for some reason unavailable.
Or is privacy was violated to the point where hiding your arms was necessary.

There are some that prefer concealed carry. I however prefer Open Carry. These are personal choices, but are becoming legal issues due to laws being written to disarm people.

Lastly, if it becomes necessary to hide our arms, then undetectable arms would be that much more important.