400 million guns

[progressive hunter]

I did, tard. I guess you're too fucken thick to understand it. Those dem-run cities that seem to have the most problems controlling their crime are in red-run states, especially the ones that have more liberal gun laws and extra especially the ones that used to have slavery and segregation.

So how did that happen?



You're going through a lot of data contortions to make your point. No fucking person outside the United States (where gun violence is lower in most cases) would take this kind of argument seriously. Anyone can pick and choose the data they don't like.



Nope.



You admit that you use cooked up data in one line and then accuse me of lying in the next. Good God, you're putting on a master class on how to be a ding dong dishonest dipshit.

I dont have to contort anything,, just post facts,,

sorry they debunk your false narrative and hurt your feelings,,

 

[Deplorable Yankee]

"...Gun control is like a donut: there is no middle. On the one side you have people who love guns, and if you disagree with them, they’ll threaten to shoot you. On the other side you have people who detest guns, mainly out of fear of getting shot. It is an ideological death-match in which the voices of reason and compromise don’t seem to exist. Or if they do, no one can hear them over the sounds of the shouting and posturing
and the bumper-sticker slogans about cold dead hands." --"Matt" (anonymous) from his review of Adam Winkler's 'Gunfight, the Battle Over the Second Amendment in America"

There are some 400 million guns in America, and if guns were making us safer, we'd be the safest place on earth, which America is not.

That is a fact Republicans cannot reconcile.

And to average republican, I guess that for them, they aren't enough.

Guns deaths have taken the lead in children, and this is a fairly recent development. And, please, no crap about 'well, half those deaths are suicide' because,
simply because that stat isn't caused by fewer guns, let's be clear.

So I hope those of you second amendment 'cold dead hands' types are happy.

It sure isn't for the parents of those dead children whose lives have been ruined by your cherished 'second amendment'.

Personally, though America's second amendment was a necessary component of life in the frontiers of the late 18th century when the nation was founded, they could not have foreseen 233 years into the future to know of a modern urban landscape where weapons could kill hundreds of people in a relatively short period of time, that had they known, it is doubtful they would have confined the second amendment's langage to one compound sentence, whose actual meaning continues to be debated to this day.

It's time for a 28th Amendment to update the 2nd, a vertible 2nd Amendment 2.0, as it were, and as to what the new language would be, I'll let you guys duke it out, but it needs to be updated,

It's time.

Cheers,
Rumpole

Ban blacks, trannies, and illegals ?

 

[Lesh]

Did you read the post re responded to?
It didnt have anything to do with a claim of militia privilege as per the 2A.

Hey fucking idiot… he QUOTED my post which had nothing to do with that

 

[BlindBoo]

no its not,, its about what the constitution says,,

its written in simple english,,
if someone claims it needs interpretation they are lying and intend on doing you harm,,

They can revert control and regulations back to the states.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

"...Gun control is like a donut: there is no middle. On the one side you have people who love guns, and if you disagree with them, they’ll threaten to shoot you. On the other side you have people who detest guns, mainly out of fear of getting shot. It is an ideological death-match in which the voices of reason and compromise don’t seem to exist. Or if they do, no one can hear them over the sounds of the shouting and posturing
and the bumper-sticker slogans about cold dead hands." --"Matt" (anonymous) from his review of Adam Winkler's 'Gunfight, the Battle Over the Second Amendment in America"

There are some 400 million guns in America, and if guns were making us safer, we'd be the safest place on earth, which America is not.

That is a fact Republicans cannot reconcile.

And to average republican, I guess that for them, they aren't enough.

Guns deaths have taken the lead in children, and this is a fairly recent development. And, please, no crap about 'well, half those deaths are suicide' because,
simply because that stat isn't caused by fewer guns, let's be clear.

So I hope those of you second amendment 'cold dead hands' types are happy.

It sure isn't for the parents of those dead children whose lives have been ruined by your cherished 'second amendment'.

Personally, though America's second amendment was a necessary component of life in the frontiers of the late 18th century when the nation was founded, they could not have foreseen 233 years into the future to know of a modern urban landscape where weapons could kill hundreds of people in a relatively short period of time, that had they known, it is doubtful they would have confined the second amendment's langage to one compound sentence, whose actual meaning continues to be debated to this day.

It's time for a 28th Amendment to update the 2nd, a vertible 2nd Amendment 2.0, as it were, and as to what the new language would be, I'll let you guys duke it out, but it needs to be updated,

It's time.

Cheers,
Rumpole

I am not a Repub, but I am a big advocate for the 2nd Amendment.

Good luck with your attempt at a 28th, till then you do not get to ignore the 2nd.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Hey fucking idiot…

The irony inherent to the above cannot be overstated.

he QUOTED my post which had nothing to do with that

No. He responded to Boo's post:

400 million guns

www.usmessageboard.com

YOU started squawking about claiming militia privilege, which ad ZERO to do with his post or the post re responded to.

Tell your mother to stop hiding your meds.
I get why she does it - it's entertaining as all hell - but probably not in your best interest.

 

[M14 Shooter]

They can revert control and regulations back to the states.

Sure.
Why do you think that would happen?

 

[progressive hunter]

They can revert control and regulations back to the states.

according to the 2nd A that gives the right to the people and the constitution saying we are the people while applying the 10th A that says since its not specifically to the states or the feds but to the people the states and feds have no authority to legally infringe on any rights pertaining to arms/guns,,

sorry but thats the facts of the issue,,

 

[westwall]

Been over it a thousand times retard. If you had any grey matter between your lugs to stop information, then you wouldn't be posting retarded posts. But you're American, so you just spew the usual nonsensical shit.

That just happens to blow your infantile opinions right out of the water.


DURRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR

 

[hadit]

And we “need” cars to maintain our way of life.. so for convenience. You accept all those car deaths for your mere convenience. How does that feel?

Actually, it's worse than that. They accept all those deaths just so they can drive fast. If no car was able to exceed 35 mph, we could keep the cars and the number of deaths would drop dramatically, but they won't accept that, because, again, they like to drive fast.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Disingenuous claim. The KKK of the mid 19th and early 20th century (who were not liberals), is not the DNC of today. Today, most KKKers are republicans,
View attachment 779534

The Civil Rights Act was introduced by Democrats (sponsors from both sides) and signed into law by a Democrat (LBJ) in 1964. Liberals on both sides voted for it, and in those days, both sides had their liberal and conservative wing, i.e., liberals both sides voting for the CRA and conservatives on both sides voting against.


Senator Robert Byrd was a KKK member many many years prior to his being a Senator, long since disavowed the KKK and apologized for it too many times to count, so your point is disingenuous.

Senator Robert Byrd disavowed his past affiliation with the Ku Klux Klan (KKK) years before his death. He joined the KKK in the early 1940s and held a leadership position within the organization. However, he later claimed that his involvement was a mistake, and he repeatedly apologized and expressed regret for his actions.

Throughout his career, Byrd evolved on civil rights issues and came to support legislation aimed at reducing racial discrimination and promoting equality. In particular, he eventually backed the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Voting Rights Act of 1965, and the Fair Housing Act of 1968. By the time of his death, he had distanced himself significantly from his earlier association with the KKK, and many civil rights leaders acknowledged his growth and transformation on these issues.

There's this thing called 'honesty', you might want to try it, you'll feel better.

So the democrat Party is NOT the Planned Parenthood Black Eugenics Party? Not the KKK? Not LBJ “I’ll have then ******* voting democrat for the next 200 years” Party? Not the high crime, no education inner City party?

 

[Oddball]

Here, let me help you out:

Members of the National Guard are rarely covered by the Posse Comitatus Act because they usually report to their state or territory’s governor. That means they are free to participate in law enforcement if doing so is consistent with state law. However, when Guard personnel are called into federal service, or “federalized,” they become part of the federal armed forces, which means they are bound by the Posse Comitatus Act until they are returned to state control.

The Posse Comitatus Act Explained

The law generally prevents the president from using the military as a domestic police force.

www.brennancenter.org

Meaning if they were federal Posse Comitatus would apply at all times.

Next, if they were federal they would fall under the Uniformed Code of Military Justice, known as the UCMJ. That is why Bush, or any other National Guardsman can not be charge under the UCMJ with AWOL for missing drill weekends. The UCMJ does not apply to the Guard unless they are federalized.

Orwellean words mean nothing....They're ultimately DoD.

 

[Auld Phart]

It was the Militias that were necessary for the security of a free state. Co-opting the Colonial Militias of the day where every able bodied white male was required to join. The Militias have been written out of most of the recent SC court decisions in support the rights of the Weapons Industry to sell to the public. Though I suppose that a change in that precedent is just an new opinion away if the liberals ever get a majority on the court.

Co-opting the Colonial Militias of the day where every able bodied white male was required to join.

You should do some homework before you spout outright bullshit.

Militias of the time consisted of able bodied males between the ages of 16-45.

 

[Auld Phart]

Why do you use The 2A to justify mass murder?

what part of the 2A justifies mass murder?

 

[Auld Phart]

Are you a criminal?
Because we are only talking about keeping them out of the hands of criminals.
Or maybe you are saying that mass murder is acceptable as long as you don't have to be inconvenienced?

Because we are only talking about keeping them out of the hands of criminals.

What law can they pass that will criminals will obey but won't affect non criminals?

 

[Mr. Friscus]

Actually, it's worse than that. They accept all those deaths just so they can drive fast. If no car was able to exceed 35 mph, we could keep the cars and the number of deaths would drop dramatically, but they won't accept that, because, again, they like to drive fast.

Yep, but they claim to care about anonymous dead people from gun murders on a deep personal level (and only ones that follow a specific race quota), while the car fatalities they drive over the corpses whistling, uncaring.

Or.. it’s about the guns. I mean, just imagine how much of a crazed ideologue you have to be to read “shall not be infringed” and still think it’s okay to gun grab. It’s just the sign of an unintelligent person

 

[multivita-man]

I am not a Repub, but I am a big advocate for the 2nd Amendment.

Good luck with your attempt at a 28th, till then you do not get to ignore the 2nd.

We don't need a 28th Amendment; we need a federal judiciary that isn't so blatantly corrupt and compromised by special interest money as it has been since 2000. One that would reverse every single goddamned conservative majority decision since 2000. That, too, is a fantasy, but that would be the solution to this and other con-law debates: a judicial restoration, let's call it.

Not asking for a radical lefty court, just a moderate court that would render decisions based on actual legal scholarship instead of ranting about things that aren't even germane to the subject being discussed a la Alito.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

We don't need a 28th Amendment; we need a federal judiciary that isn't so blatantly corrupt and compromised by special interest money as it has been since 2000. One that would reverse every single goddamned conservative majority decision since 2000. That, too, is a fantasy, but that would be the solution to this and other con-law debates: a judicial restoration, let's call it.

Not asking for a radical lefty court, just a moderate court that would render decisions based on actual legal scholarship instead of ranting about things that aren't even germane to the subject being discussed a la Alito.

So, you want a federal judiciary that will ignore the 2nd Amendment and pretend it is not there?

 

[multivita-man]

So, you want a federal judiciary that will ignore the 2nd Amendment and pretend it is not there?

I think most gun rights enthusiasts misunderstand the 2nd Amendment and unfortunately, they have been enabled by a judiciary that is absolutely, unquestionably partisan and corrupt, owing their positions of judicial power to big money, legislative gerrymandering, and Mitch McConnell's procedural warfare.

I give zero fucks what the Supreme Court since 2000 (and especially since 2005) says on the matter -- those are not valid arguments in my view. Conservatives have the power, so we have to live with their rulings, but they don't have the legitimacy when it comes to this issue or any other controversies that have ultimately been decided by the Court in conservatives' favor.

Do I believe that people have at least some right or privilege to keep some guns in their closet to go hunting or defend their home? I do, but it's not necessarily under the 2nd Amendment (at least not strictly). Maybe under 9th Amendment or some combination of the 9th and 2nd.

The 2nd Amendment says "right to keep and bear arms"; it doesn't say guns, and it doesn't say that every person has the right to keep and bear any and all arms without restriction.

 

[Auld Phart]

I think most gun rights enthusiasts misunderstand the 2nd Amendment and unfortunately, they have been enabled by a judiciary that is absolutely, unquestionably partisan and corrupt, owing their positions of judicial power to big money, legislative gerrymandering, and Mitch McConnell's procedural warfare.

I give zero fucks what the Supreme Court since 2000 (and especially since 2005) says on the matter -- those are not valid arguments in my view. Conservatives have the power, so we have to live with their rulings, but they don't have the legitimacy when it comes to this issue or any other controversies that have ultimately been decided by the Court in conservatives' favor.

Do I believe that people have at least some right or privilege to keep some guns in their closet to go hunting or defend their home? I do, but it's not necessarily under the 2nd Amendment (at least not strictly). Maybe under 9th Amendment or some combination of the 9th and 2nd.

The 2nd Amendment says "right to keep and bear arms"; it doesn't say guns, and it doesn't say that every person has the right to keep and bear any and all arms without restriction.

it doesn't say that every person has the right to keep and bear any and all arms without restriction.

without restriction?

There are 25.000+ laws on the books restricting firearms,

How long have you been in a coma?