Democrat Platform destroys the Right to Keep and Bear Arms.

[Levant]

You should stop with the Ad hominem
what rights do you keep when you murder someone?

Do you lose the right to a trial by jury of your peers if you murder someone? Do you lose the right to an attorney? Do you lose the right against self-incrimination? Do you lose the right to free speech? Freedom of religion? Freedom of peaceful assembly? If you have committed a murder, does your family also lose all of those rights?

I don't understand why so many so-called, self-proclaimed, conservatives or constitutionalists think that the right to keep and bear arms is the one right that can be stripped from someone who has paid their debt and released from jail or prison or from the family of someone who has paid their debt and released from jail or prison.

You lose your rights while you're in prison
People who have been released and paid their debt should regain all rights

They don't lose their rights while they're in prison. All of those others I mentioned still apply while in prison. You may not be allowed to exercise the rights but the rights still exist. They're God-given, or natural (choose your own source) inalienable rights. They can never be taken and you can never lose them. They can only be infringed or restricted by someone stronger or more powerful than you. You don't regain them upon release. They are as natural or God-given on release as they were before prison.

 

[Levant]

alang1216 obviously believe that the SC can make the Constitution say whatever they want. People like him are the reason this country is so fucked up.

Unfortunately, so does the Supreme Court.

Only the douchebags in the court believe that.

That would be 7 of the 9. Only Thomas and Alito have stood by the Constitution.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

alang1216 obviously believe that the SC can make the Constitution say whatever they want. People like him are the reason this country is so fucked up.

Unfortunately, so does the Supreme Court.

It's not the job of the courts to legislate from the bench

 

[daveman]

I've been saying for years, and this thread is yet more evidence I'm right:

Democrats want to disarm law-abiding citizens.

Why?

Because disarmed people cannot resist totalitarianism.

And if any of you leftists here want to disagree, save it. You can't be believed, and you can't be trusted.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

You should stop with the Ad hominem
what rights do you keep when you murder someone?

Do you lose the right to a trial by jury of your peers if you murder someone? Do you lose the right to an attorney? Do you lose the right against self-incrimination? Do you lose the right to free speech? Freedom of religion? Freedom of peaceful assembly? If you have committed a murder, does your family also lose all of those rights?

I don't understand why so many so-called, self-proclaimed, conservatives or constitutionalists think that the right to keep and bear arms is the one right that can be stripped from someone who has paid their debt and released from jail or prison or from the family of someone who has paid their debt and released from jail or prison.

You lose your rights while you're in prison
People who have been released and paid their debt should regain all rights

They don't lose their rights while they're in prison. All of those others I mentioned still apply while in prison. You may not be allowed to exercise the rights but the rights still exist. They're God-given, or natural (choose your own source) inalienable rights. They can never be taken and you can never lose them. They can only be infringed or restricted by someone stronger or more powerful than you. You don't regain them upon release. They are as natural or God-given on release as they were before prison.

No you don't have rights while you are in prison
You are their to pay a debt
You don't have a right to protest
You don't have a right to vote
You don't have a right to move about freely
You don't even have a right to self defense

 

[SassyIrishLass]

The filthy ass Democrats have never understood the Bill of Rights, have they?

Elect the asshole Democrats and you get your Constitution rights taken away and they tell you that it is for your own good.

They sure as hell don't understand what the word "infringement" means, do they? Typical for uneducated Liberals.

The only license I need to own a gun is the Bill of Rights. I sure as hell don't need some Democrat Moon Bat politician that have never fired a firearm telling me how to store and keep my firearms.

https://www.politico.com/f/?id=00000173-782a-d3de-ab7b-783b9b650000

12020 Democratic Party Platform


Democrats will enact universal background checks, end online sales of guns and ammunition,
close dangerous loopholes that currently allow stalkers and some individuals convicted of assault
or battery to buy and possess firearms, and adequately fund the federal background check
system. We will close the “Charleston loophole” and prevent individuals who have been
convicted of hate crimes from possessing firearms. Democrats will ban the manufacture and sale
of assault weapons and high capacity magazines. We will incentivize states to enact licensing
requirements for owning firearms and “red flag” laws that allow courts to temporarily remove
guns from the possession of those who are a danger to themselves or others. We will pass
legislation requiring that guns be safely stored in homes. And Democrats believe that gun
companies should be held responsible for their products, just like any other business, and will
prioritize repealing the law that shields gun manufacturers from civil liability.

No one believes this ridiculous lie.

The flip side is very few buy your BS

The first clue is you run away when confronted.

Too bad for you assholes gun owners have that pesky 2nd backing them up. Yes?

 

[bigrebnc1775]

The filthy ass Democrats have never understood the Bill of Rights, have they?

Elect the asshole Democrats and you get your Constitution rights taken away and they tell you that it is for your own good.

They sure as hell don't understand what the word "infringement" means, do they? Typical for uneducated Liberals.

The only license I need to own a gun is the Bill of Rights. I sure as hell don't need some Democrat Moon Bat politician that have never fired a firearm telling me how to store and keep my firearms.

https://www.politico.com/f/?id=00000173-782a-d3de-ab7b-783b9b650000

12020 Democratic Party Platform


Democrats will enact universal background checks, end online sales of guns and ammunition,
close dangerous loopholes that currently allow stalkers and some individuals convicted of assault
or battery to buy and possess firearms, and adequately fund the federal background check
system. We will close the “Charleston loophole” and prevent individuals who have been
convicted of hate crimes from possessing firearms. Democrats will ban the manufacture and sale
of assault weapons and high capacity magazines. We will incentivize states to enact licensing
requirements for owning firearms and “red flag” laws that allow courts to temporarily remove
guns from the possession of those who are a danger to themselves or others. We will pass
legislation requiring that guns be safely stored in homes. And Democrats believe that gun
companies should be held responsible for their products, just like any other business, and will
prioritize repealing the law that shields gun manufacturers from civil liability.

No one believes this ridiculous lie.

The flip side is very few buy your BS

The first clue is you run away when confronted.

Too bad for you assholes gun owners have that pesky 2nd backing them up. Yes?

Even without a second amendment spelling out what the Government cannot do I would still retain all rights to self-defense just as anyone else.

 

[alang1216]

Speech and assembly are Rights but there are limits imposed on each. We have Rights, we don't have absolute Rights, they are all limited in one way or another.

The limits are never what SJW assholes claim they are.

Not SJW, but SCOTUS.

It's not up to the courts to supersede the Constitution
For that, it would take a Constitutional convention
OR
Congress amending the Constitution and with the approval of 2/3rds of the states

The courts interpret the Constitution and their say is final until the Constitution is changed.

 

[Slade3200]

As I said feel free to call me a dem all you want. I no longer give a shit

It's funny you think I need your permission.

You’ve grown boring and have lost your way in this discussion

I must have missed the part in the rules that requires me to agree with you.

There is no requirement for agreement smart ass. I enjoy a good debate, but it takes two honest actors to do it right

 

[alang1216]

Speech and assembly are Rights but there are limits imposed on each. We have Rights, we don't have absolute Rights, they are all limited in one way or another.

The limits are never what SJW assholes claim they are.

Not SJW, but SCOTUS.

They are 9, politically appointed lawyers.........they aren't saints.

Yeah, I hear what you're saying, democracy sucks.

actually we aren't a democracy we are a REPUBLIC that protects individual rights against the majority or (democracy)

And how is that relevant in this instance?

 

[alang1216]

Speech and assembly are Rights but there are limits imposed on each. We have Rights, we don't have absolute Rights, they are all limited in one way or another.

The limits are never what SJW assholes claim they are.

Not SJW, but SCOTUS.

It's not up to the courts to supersede the Constitution
For that, it would take a Constitutional convention
OR
Congress amending the Constitution and with the approval of 2/3rds of the states

alang1216 obviously believe that the SC can make the Constitution say whatever they want. People like him are the reason this country is so fucked up.

The fact is that SCOTUS can and they do.

 

[daveman]

As I said feel free to call me a dem all you want. I no longer give a shit

It's funny you think I need your permission.

You’ve grown boring and have lost your way in this discussion

I must have missed the part in the rules that requires me to agree with you.

There is no requirement for agreement smart ass. I enjoy a good debate, but it takes two honest actors to do it right

Oh, you mean honesty like you denying you support a platform you've done nothing but support?

Uh huh.

 

[007]

I've been saying for years, and this thread is yet more evidence I'm right:

Democrats want to disarm law-abiding citizens.

Why?

Because disarmed people cannot resist totalitarianism.

And if any of you leftists here want to disagree, save it. You can't be believed, and you can't be trusted.

If the democrats TRUSTED law abiding citizens to keep and bare arms, then they wouldn't want to DISARM everyone.

The democrats wanting to do away with the 2nd amendment speaks volumes as to their motives. They know that their agenda is highly unpopular with the vast majority of Americans, so they know that taking away the ONE SURE MEANS of people to OPPOSE their agenda, the 2nd amendment, has to be high on the democrat wish list. They know the only way they'll be able to totally enact their radical leftist authoritarian, communistic, dictatorial agenda on the American people is by FORCE, when NO ONE is left that can RESIST.

 

[bripat9643]

Speech and assembly are Rights but there are limits imposed on each. We have Rights, we don't have absolute Rights, they are all limited in one way or another.

The limits are never what SJW assholes claim they are.

Not SJW, but SCOTUS.

It's not up to the courts to supersede the Constitution
For that, it would take a Constitutional convention
OR
Congress amending the Constitution and with the approval of 2/3rds of the states

alang1216 obviously believe that the SC can make the Constitution say whatever they want. People like him are the reason this country is so fucked up.

The fact is that SCOTUS can and they do.

Thanks for stating the sad reality of our government. Thanks for admitting to it.

 

[alang1216]

Speech and assembly are Rights but there are limits imposed on each. We have Rights, we don't have absolute Rights, they are all limited in one way or another.

The limits are never what SJW assholes claim they are.

Not SJW, but SCOTUS.

It's not up to the courts to supersede the Constitution
For that, it would take a Constitutional convention
OR
Congress amending the Constitution and with the approval of 2/3rds of the states

alang1216 obviously believe that the SC can make the Constitution say whatever they want. People like him are the reason this country is so fucked up.

The fact is that SCOTUS can and they do.

Thanks for stating the sad reality of our government. Thanks for admitting to it.

Thanks for admitting your hatred of America.

 

[daveman]

Speech and assembly are Rights but there are limits imposed on each. We have Rights, we don't have absolute Rights, they are all limited in one way or another.

The limits are never what SJW assholes claim they are.

Not SJW, but SCOTUS.

It's not up to the courts to supersede the Constitution
For that, it would take a Constitutional convention
OR
Congress amending the Constitution and with the approval of 2/3rds of the states

alang1216 obviously believe that the SC can make the Constitution say whatever they want. People like him are the reason this country is so fucked up.

The fact is that SCOTUS can and they do.

Thanks for stating the sad reality of our government. Thanks for admitting to it.

Thanks for admitting your hatred of America.

Mindless lashing out isn't a rational argument, kid.

 

[JuvenalsCat]

The filthy ass Democrats have never understood the Bill of Rights, have they?

Elect the asshole Democrats and you get your Constitution rights taken away and they tell you that it is for your own good.

They sure as hell don't understand what the word "infringement" means, do they? Typical for uneducated Liberals.

The only license I need to own a gun is the Bill of Rights. I sure as hell don't need some Democrat Moon Bat politician that have never fired a firearm telling me how to store and keep my firearms.

https://www.politico.com/f/?id=00000173-782a-d3de-ab7b-783b9b650000

12020 Democratic Party Platform


Democrats will enact universal background checks, end online sales of guns and ammunition,
close dangerous loopholes that currently allow stalkers and some individuals convicted of assault
or battery to buy and possess firearms, and adequately fund the federal background check
system. We will close the “Charleston loophole” and prevent individuals who have been
convicted of hate crimes from possessing firearms. Democrats will ban the manufacture and sale
of assault weapons and high capacity magazines. We will incentivize states to enact licensing
requirements for owning firearms and “red flag” laws that allow courts to temporarily remove
guns from the possession of those who are a danger to themselves or others. We will pass
legislation requiring that guns be safely stored in homes. And Democrats believe that gun
companies should be held responsible for their products, just like any other business, and will
prioritize repealing the law that shields gun manufacturers from civil liability.

This is nonsense. Just because I'm a convicted stalker that means I shouldn't be allowed to own a firearm? This is what happens when we let feminists/women in government. We get these anti-male and anti-liberty laws. It's bad enough I am not allowed within 5,000 feet of any schools. Time take back our liberties and rights.

 

[Slade3200]

first of all you don’t know which laws I support or don’t support.

In this case do you think the guy with the record should be able to waltz into that store and buy a gun no questions asked?

Yes, he should be able to buy a gun, no questions asked. It's not the ownership of a gun that should make a criminal, it's what a person does with the gun. That the guy 2aguy mention, the one that shot 3 cops, was not able to legally buy a gun didn't stop him from getting a gun and shooting 3 cops. Being in prison for the entire legally possible time for armed robbery would have stopped him from shooting these cops.

I disagree I think limiting who we sell guns to makes a difference. I don’t think it stops everybody from getting a gun but it stops some. Plus every time the cops bust a straw buyer or an illegal gun transaction they are preventing guns from being obtained and used which would not happen if anybody could simply go buy from a store

 

[Slade3200]

Well that depends on how you define infringe. Many feel that infringe means that you can not take that right away but regulating it is acceptable. I happen to agree with that and I imagine you do as well if you were being honest. Hence my uzi sale to a 10 year old example.

infringe
[inˈfrinj]

VERB

1. 
   
2. 
   
3. 
   
4. actively break the terms of (a law, agreement, etc.).
   "making an unauthorized copy would infringe copyright"
   synonyms:
   contravene · violate · transgress · break · breach · commit a breach of · disobey · defy · flout · fly in the face of · ride roughshod over · kick against · fail to comply with ·
   [more]
   • act so as to limit or undermine (something); encroach on.
     "his legal rights were being infringed" ·
     [more]
     synonyms:
     undermine · erode · diminish · weaken · impair · damage · compromise · limit · curb · check · place a limit on · encroach on · interfere with · disturb · disrupt · trespass on · impinge on · intrude on · enter · invade · barge in on · burst in on · entrench on

2. 1828 meaning:
   

   INFRINGE, verb transitive infrinj'. [Latin infringo; in and frango, to break. See Break.]
   
   1. To break, as contracts; to violate, either positively by contravention, or negatively by non-fulfillment or neglect of performance. A prince or a private person infringes an agreement or covenant by neglecting to perform its conditions, as well as by doing what is stipulated not to be done.
   
   2. To break; to violate; to transgress; to neglect to fulfill or obey; as, to infringe a law.
   
   3. To destroy or hinder; as, to infringe efficacy. [Little used.]

   Regulating infringes the right. Plain and simple.
   
   
   

It does not infringe if the citizen is still able to purchase a gun.

 

[Flash]

I've been saying for years, and this thread is yet more evidence I'm right:

Democrats want to disarm law-abiding citizens.

Why?

Because disarmed people cannot resist totalitarianism.

And if any of you leftists here want to disagree, save it. You can't be believed, and you can't be trusted.

The filthy ass Democrats are hell bent to make this country a Socialist shithole.

The Bill of Rights is an impediment to that goal, especially the right to keep and bear arms. Socialists countries have always disarmed their populace.