Honest and open debate on gun control

[Derideo_Te]

Registration of guns and licensing of gun owners are two sides of the same coin -- a precondition laid upon the exercise of the right not inherent to same; the state cannot create the plenary requirement for you to tell it when and how you will exercise your rights in order for you to then gain permission form the state to do so.

And yet that is exactly what happens with voting rights.

You have to be registered in order to be able to vote and the state determines when and where you can vote.

What is the difference between voting rights and gun rights as far as registration goes? The state has a right to know who has guns and which guns they have in order to be able to call on a militia to defend the state. The state is not infringing on your right to own a gun by requiring that you and your gun are registered.

Your position is a fallacy because the 2nd Amendment is clearly based upon the state's right to regulate.

 

[MikeK]

The Great Depression happened because they tried to get out of it by raising taxes and tariffs which wrecked the recovery...

Think about that sentence: The Great Depression happened because they tried to get out of it...

If something hadn't happened yet, what is it they were trying to get out of?

The Great Depression was brought about by the same kind of shady manipulations of the stock market which nearly caused a repeat of that disaster in 2008.

then socialist FDR started trying to control all aspects of the economy and slowed down the recovery even more......

FDR initiated the only effective approach to ending the Depression by creating federally funded make-work programs such as the WPA and the CCC, which gave my father a job and rescued my family from near-homeless poverty. FDR funded those programs by imposing a 97% income tax on the upper brackets -- which is why the super-rich and their water carriers have been fomenting and spreading the kind of misleading propaganda about the Depression era and how FDR managed to transform it into the vibrant economy that gave rise to the American Middle Class.

I should mention that those make-work programs did not in any way resemble welfare because they effected many very necessary repairs on and restorations of the infrastructure -- something which is desperately needed today. So it's too bad we don't have another socialist President like FDR.

Don't allow yourself to be misled about the true nature and value of a strong socialist influence on our capitalist system. Because socialism is what provides the energy that keeps the wheels turning.

 

[M14 Shooter]

363 posts, no sound responses.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Don't allow yourself to be misled about the true nature and value of a strong socialist influence on our capitalist system. Because socialism is what provides the energy that keeps the wheels turning.

Completely off topic, but...
There was no capitalism before the advent of socialism?

 

[2aguy]

The Great Depression happened because they tried to get out of it by raising taxes and tariffs which wrecked the recovery...

Think about that sentence: The Great Depression happened because they tried to get out of it...

If something hadn't happened yet, what is it they were trying to get out of?

The Great Depression was brought about by the same kind of shady manipulations of the stock market which nearly caused a repeat of that disaster in 2008.

then socialist FDR started trying to control all aspects of the economy and slowed down the recovery even more......

FDR initiated the only effective approach to ending the Depression by creating federally funded make-work programs such as the WPA and the CCC, which gave my father a job and rescued my family from near-homeless poverty. FDR funded those programs by imposing a 97% income tax on the upper brackets -- which is why the super-rich and their water carriers have been fomenting and spreading the kind of misleading propaganda about the Depression era and how FDR managed to transform it into the vibrant economy that gave rise to the American Middle Class.

I should mention that those make-work programs did not in any way resemble welfare because they effected many very necessary repairs on and restorations of the infrastructure -- something which is desperately needed today. So it's too bad we don't have another socialist President like FDR.

Don't allow yourself to be misled about the true nature and value of a strong socialist influence on our capitalist system. Because socialism is what provides the energy that keeps the wheels turning.

You

You realize the country didn't get out of the Depression..right? That what he did deepened and lengthened the depression. Had he just let the economy work...we would have been out of the depression long before World War 2. Raising taxes, raising tarrifs, screwing with the economy and wasting tax money....wrecked any chance at coming out of the depression....

 

[2aguy]

The Great Depression happened because they tried to get out of it by raising taxes and tariffs which wrecked the recovery...

Think about that sentence: The Great Depression happened because they tried to get out of it...

If something hadn't happened yet, what is it they were trying to get out of?

The Great Depression was brought about by the same kind of shady manipulations of the stock market which nearly caused a repeat of that disaster in 2008.

then socialist FDR started trying to control all aspects of the economy and slowed down the recovery even more......

FDR initiated the only effective approach to ending the Depression by creating federally funded make-work programs such as the WPA and the CCC, which gave my father a job and rescued my family from near-homeless poverty. FDR funded those programs by imposing a 97% income tax on the upper brackets -- which is why the super-rich and their water carriers have been fomenting and spreading the kind of misleading propaganda about the Depression era and how FDR managed to transform it into the vibrant economy that gave rise to the American Middle Class.

I should mention that those make-work programs did not in any way resemble welfare because they effected many very necessary repairs on and restorations of the infrastructure -- something which is desperately needed today. So it's too bad we don't have another socialist President like FDR.

Don't allow yourself to be misled about the true nature and value of a strong socialist influence on our capitalist system. Because socialism is what provides the energy that keeps the wheels turning.

The 97% tax rate sank our economy and that on top of restrictive tarrifs made sure we were good and stuck and couldn't recover.....and all that he did....did not get us out of the depression, did it..?

Here is another depression...which we recovered from without FDR...

The Depression of 1893

 

[2aguy]

The Great Depression happened because they tried to get out of it by raising taxes and tariffs which wrecked the recovery...

Think about that sentence: The Great Depression happened because they tried to get out of it...

If something hadn't happened yet, what is it they were trying to get out of?

The Great Depression was brought about by the same kind of shady manipulations of the stock market which nearly caused a repeat of that disaster in 2008.

then socialist FDR started trying to control all aspects of the economy and slowed down the recovery even more......

FDR initiated the only effective approach to ending the Depression by creating federally funded make-work programs such as the WPA and the CCC, which gave my father a job and rescued my family from near-homeless poverty. FDR funded those programs by imposing a 97% income tax on the upper brackets -- which is why the super-rich and their water carriers have been fomenting and spreading the kind of misleading propaganda about the Depression era and how FDR managed to transform it into the vibrant economy that gave rise to the American Middle Class.

I should mention that those make-work programs did not in any way resemble welfare because they effected many very necessary repairs on and restorations of the infrastructure -- something which is desperately needed today. So it's too bad we don't have another socialist President like FDR.

Don't allow yourself to be misled about the true nature and value of a strong socialist influence on our capitalist system. Because socialism is what provides the energy that keeps the wheels turning.

And for the 97% tax rates, the massive government spending, the trade choking tarrifs and the meddling in business...how did that work for the unemployment rate.......

You really should show that all of those things helped end the depression...but they didn't....so you can't....

Facts About The Great Depression Facts About Unemployment Job Loss


Here are some interesting facts about unemployment during the Great Depression:

•In 1929, unemployment was at 3%

•In 1930, unemployment had jumped to 9%.

•In 1931, unemployment reached almost 16%.

•In 1932, unemployment climbed to 24%

•In 1933, unemployment reached almost 25%.


•In 1934, unemployment dipped slightly, to 22%.

•In 1935, unemployment fell to 20%.

•In 1936, unemployment dropped to 17%.

•In 1937, unemployment lowered to 14%.

•In 1938, unemployment rose again, to 19%.

•In 1933, which could be considered the worst year during the Great Depression (which lasted from 1929-1941), more than 11 million people were unemployed.

Here is some advice...never, ever trust a left wing history teacher...they lie....and when they aren't lying they don't know what they are talking about....

If what you say is true then the depression should have been getting better...it didn't....did it?

 

[2aguy]

FDR initiated the only effective approach to ending the Depression

Ummmm...nothing he did ended the depression....it wasted time and money and peoples lives.......but it did not end the depression....

 

[Derideo_Te]

Don't allow yourself to be misled about the true nature and value of a strong socialist influence on our capitalist system. Because socialism is what provides the energy that keeps the wheels turning.

Completely off topic, but...
There was no capitalism before the advent of socialism?

Without any society there is no need for capitalism.

 

[2aguy]

Don't allow yourself to be misled about the true nature and value of a strong socialist influence on our capitalist system. Because socialism is what provides the energy that keeps the wheels turning.

Completely off topic, but...
There was no capitalism before the advent of socialism?

Without any society there is no need for capitalism.

Without any society you are rooting in the mud for dinner...

 

[Ame®icano]

There is a proof. Now tell me, or show me, where The Constitution gives authority to Federal government to do any of what you said?

10th Amendemnt argument, Nice.

The right to keep and bear arms is a fundamental right specifically protected by the constitution.
As such, restrictions placed on the right to keep and bear arms must pass a test of strict scrutiny.
Under that test, the restriction is presumed unconstitutional until the state shows the restriction serves as a means to achieve a compelling state interest, is narrowly tailored to that effect, and the least restrictive means to that end.

And so, the onus is on those who would restrict the right, not on those who would exercise it -- as it should be.

There is more then 10th Amendment. Almost every Amendment is about individual freedom and limiting powers of the government. Founding fathers didn't have a problem people being armed as well as the military because, unlike today's government, regardless if is left or right, they didn't see themselves as our rulers. Only those who rule have to worry about being overthrown, and they know that without guns that can't be done.

Federalist paper #46: James Madison wrote that the reason the citizens are armed is to defend themselves, their families, neighborhoods, communities, and States from an overreaching, tyrannical federal government.

 

[Ame®icano]

Onus is on you to prove that it is unconstitutional to register guns since the Founding Fathers did exactly that as one of their very first acts of Congress. And yes that included registration of gun owners.

Background checks are used all the time in this nation. The onus is on you to prove that they are unconstitutional.

When founding fathers in the name of "we the people" have written The Constitution, and created the federal government, it also gave to that government enumerated powers listed in Article 1, Section 8. That's what The Constitution allows government to do. If you wondering why The Constitution is so short, it's because "we the people" don't want federal government to have too much power.

What federal government is constantly trying to do is to give themselves authority over things they simply have no rights over, and every time they do so, they're taking away more freedom that's guaranteed to us by The Constitution.

There is a proof. Now tell me, or show me, where The Constitution gives authority to Federal government to do any of what you said?

There are registries of voters. Are they unconstitutional? Has anyone had their vote taken away because they are registered to vote? How is registering gun owners any different to registering voters?

Onus remains on you to prove that it is unconstitutional.

Short attention span? Read Article 1, Section 8 of The Constitution. Enumerated powers of federal government. Do you see gun control there? I don't. Therefore, it's unconstitutional.

 

[Ame®icano]

There are registries of voters. Are they unconstitutional? Has anyone had their vote taken away because they are registered to vote? How is registering gun owners any different to registering voters?
Onus remains on you to prove that it is unconstitutional.

Let me ask you... who keeps those registers, federal or state government?

 

[Ame®icano]

It can be found here in the Constitution:

'Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose: For example, concealed weapons prohibitions have been upheld under the Amendment or state analogues. The Court’s opinion should not be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms. Miller’s holding that the sorts of weapons protected are those “in common use at the time” finds support in the historical tradition of prohibiting the carrying of dangerous and unusual weapons. Pp. 54–56.'

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA v. HELLER

The Constitution exists solely in the context of its case law, as interpreted by the Supreme Court, authorized by the doctrine of judicial review and Articles III and VI; “but that's not in the Constitution” is a failed and ignorant 'argument.'

Huh?

Historical tradition of prohibiting the carrying of dangerous and unusual weapons. Is that a law, or tradition?

There is also Article 1, Section 8, Clause 11 that gives authority to Congress to authorize privately owned armed ships to make war on the enemies of the United States. Basically, according to The Constitution, you can have dangerous and unusual weapons such as battleship, or tank, or machine gun. The regulations of those weapons are again, by The Constitution, left to the states, as it should be.

 

[Ame®icano]

No....it isn't. Registration of firearms is the first step to confiscation and banning....historically it has happened time and again...we are not going to let it happen......we will get more of our own justices now to tell you the way it will be...since that is now what the court is....

Leading cause of death in the past couple of centuries is democide. The 2nd Amendment is there to prevent that.

 

[westwall]

I do. I bo

I have semi-automatic guns that are over 100 years old

Really! Don't tell me you have a Mondragon.

I do. I bought mine 30 years ago.

Really? That is impressive. You must be a serious collector, if it's in good condition it must be worth at least $10,000. I saw a Mondragon once at the big Reno gun show about ten years ago.
Correction, it has to be worth at least $25,000 and possibly as much as 40,000.

I paid around 5 grand for it when I first bought it. Nowadays it's worth upwards of 45k. Fifty K on a good day. What's funny is I bought it at the Shotgun News gun show at the MGM Grand which grew up to be the Big Reno Gun Show.

Your Mondragon is worth about twice as much as my whole collection.

It's not a contest. At one time I had well over 500 firearms. Now I'm down to a couple hundred. I've kept the rare and unusual.

 

[Kosh]

You can not have an honest debate with a far left drone, it is not possible.

They are wrong most of the time, yet can not admit it. They will still push a narrative now matter how many times has been debunked.

You can not have any real gun control with a wide open border..

 

[westwall]

Define "Well Regulated".

That is easier to do if we substitute the words organized and trained for the word, regulated," which was a component of a seventeenth century vocabulary. Just keep in mind that the Second Amendment protects the People's right to "keep and bear," not the militia's, and it's easier to understand.

If we are relegated to regard the 2nd amendment in 18th century terms, we should remember the state of weapon technology during the 18th century.

I have no problem with our remembering the state of weapon technology during the 18th century.

The citizens were armed with the same weapons that the finest armies in the world carried.

The finest armies had rockets, mortar bombs and ships of the line with cannons.

How many citizens had those weapons?

The Ancient and Honorable Artillery Company of Boston was a private artillery unit. They saw service in every war we've been in.

 

[westwall]

That is easier to do if we substitute the words organized and trained for the word, regulated," which was a component of a seventeenth century vocabulary. Just keep in mind that the Second Amendment protects the People's right to "keep and bear," not the militia's, and it's easier to understand.

If we are relegated to regard the 2nd amendment in 18th century terms, we should remember the state of weapon technology during the 18th century.

I have no problem with our remembering the state of weapon technology during the 18th century.

The citizens were armed with the same weapons that the finest armies in the world carried.

The finest armies had rockets, mortar bombs and ships of the line with cannons.

How many citizens had those weapons?

My mistake, I should have said "The citizens had the same rifles that the finest armies in the world carried".

Not in every household. Rifles were hand built in the 18th century and prohibitively expensive. Most individuals were NOT armed, or at least not as well armed as any soldier in the British Army.

Totally untrue. Firearms were a way of life for everyone. The sheer number of antique guns in collections proves the fallacy of your claim.

 

[Ame®icano]

Registration of guns and licensing of gun owners are two sides of the same coin -- a precondition laid upon the exercise of the right not inherent to same; absent that inherent precondition, the state cannot create the plenary requirement for you to tell it when and how you will exercise your rights in order for you to then gain permission form the state to do so.

Every dictator did exactly that. Registration always leads to confiscation. Confiscation leads to extermination. For what other reason government would want to disarm its citizens? It's all matter of control.

The best way to take control over a people and control them utterly is to take a little of their freedom at a time, to erode rights by a thousand tiny and almost imperceptible reductions. In this way, the people will not see those rights and freedoms being removed until past the point at which these changes cannot be reversed.

Those who wants to know who said it, google it.