It Was Done on Tobacco. It Can Be Done on Guns.

[Uncensored2008]

America has a strong (socialist) standing army. There is no longer need for "militia" as stated in the Second Amendment.

Learn what "socialist" means, fucktard.

 

[pismoe]

Hardcore NRA wingnuts need to be thinking about two words: "Compromise" and "Consensus"...

When it comes to the Constitution there is no such thing as "Compromise" and "Consensus".

Sure there is. Even the original Constitution was built on compromise and consensus.

------------------------------------- maybe amongst the writers of the Constitution but then the writing of the Constitution was FINALIZED and we have the Constitution that we have today Lakhota .

 

[TRFjr]

Hardcore NRA wingnuts need to be thinking about two words: "Compromise" and "Consensus"...

Harcore Abortion nuts need to be thinking about two words: "Compromise" and "Consensus"

the vast majority of those that exercise their 2nd amendment rights ever kill anyone
but every time someone exercises an abortion right a human is murdered

 

[Lakhota]

America has a strong (socialist) standing army. There is no longer need for "militia" as stated in the Second Amendment.

Learn what "socialist" means, fucktard.

I know what it means. There are various degrees and levels of socialism. It ain't one-size-fits-all.

 

[pismoe]

By Dennis A. Henigan

The American people can overcome the gun lobby, but only if we confront, and expose, three myths that have long dominated the gun debate and given the politicians a ready excuse for inaction.

First, we must not let the opponents of reform get away with the empty bromide that "guns don't kill people, people kill people." Does any rational person really believe that the Sandy Hook killer could have murdered twenty-seven people in minutes with a knife or a baseball bat? Guns enable people to kill, more effectively and efficiently than any other widely available weapon.

Second, we must challenge the idea that no law can prevent violent people from getting guns. This canard is refuted by the experience of every other western industrialized nation. Their violent crime rates are comparable to ours. But their homicide rates are exponentially lower because their strong gun laws make it harder for violent individuals to get guns.

Third, we must not accept the notion that our Constitution condemns us to the continued slaughter of our children. It is true that the Supreme Court has expanded gun rights in recent years; it is equally true that the Court has insisted that the right allows for reasonable restrictions. In his opinion in the Heller Second Amendment case, Justice Scalia listed restrictions on "dangerous and unusual weapons" among the kinds of gun laws that are still "presumptively lawful." Assault weapons that fire scores of rounds without reloading surely are "dangerous and unusual."

The tobacco control movement overcame some equally powerful mythology to fundamentally alter American attitudes toward tobacco products. The tobacco industry's effort to sow confusion and uncertainty about the link between smoking and disease eventually was exposed as a fraud. The entrenched view that smoking was simply a bad habit that individuals can choose to break was destroyed by evidence that the tobacco companies knew that nicotine was powerfully addictive and engineered their cigarettes to ensure that people got hooked and stayed hooked. The assumption that smoking harms only the smoker was contradicted by the overwhelming evidence of the danger of second-hand smoke.

Once these myths were exposed, attitudes changed, policies changed and we started saving countless lives. Since youth smoking peaked in the mid-1990s, smoking rates have fallen by about three-fourths among 8th graders, two-thirds among 10th graders and half among 12th graders. A sea change has occurred on the tobacco issue.

Similarly fundamental change can come to the gun issue as well. The myths about gun control, however, still have a hold on too many of our political leaders and their constituents. We will hear them repeated again and again in the coming weeks of intense debate. Every time we hear them, we must respond and we must persuade.

There is too much at stake to be silent.

More: Dennis A. Henigan: It Was Done on Tobacco. It Can Be Done on Guns

Well, good luck Nazi.

------------------------------------------------ just a comment but this 'henegin' guy is as lefty as can be gotten eh . He is an ENEMY of yours , mine and the USA !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Uncensored2008]

America has a strong (socialist) standing army. There is no longer need for "militia" as stated in the Second Amendment.

Learn what "socialist" means, fucktard.

I know what it means. There are various degrees and levels of socialism. It ain't one-size-fits-all.

Shitting Bull, your purely evil party has embarked on bastardizing the concept of socialism in your attempt to trick America into accepting your vile plan.

"Sea, wee not evul, da poleese iz socialist..."

No fucktard, police, fire, and the military are not socialism - you scum are just fucking liars..

 

[Bruce_T_Laney]

America has a strong (socialist) standing army. There is no longer need for "militia" as stated in the Second Amendment.

Learn what "socialist" means, fucktard.

I know what it means. There are various degrees and levels of socialism. It ain't one-size-fits-all.

Tobacco was never a Constitutional Right, so your argument is dead right there...

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

...There isn't a Constitution right to Tobacco. There is one for firearms

Oh, you'll get to keep firearm(s)... so there'll be no violation of your Constitutional rights.

It's just that you'll need a Class A or B or C or D -type license for various classes of weapons...

And you'll need to subject yourself to various levels of vetting and training and demonstrated expertise for any given Class of license...

And you'll need to "rinse and repeat" your application, training, etc, when periodically renewing each Class of license...

And you'll need to register each-and-every firearm in your possession...

And you'll be limited in the number of weapons of any given Class that you can own...

And you'll be limited in the amount of ammunition that you're allowed to have on-hand for any given weapon...

And you'll need to comply with firearms storage and transport standards...

And you'll be obliged to submit each and every proposed transfer of a firearm to proper vetting authorities empowered to grant Approval or Denial of same...

And you'll be subjected to temporary seizure of all firearms if you're charged with a felony...

And you'll be subjected to permanent seizure of all firearms and permanent revocation of all licensing if you are convicted of a violent felony...

All according to new Federal statutes that will past the Constitutional sniff-test; establishing Federal standards and bypassing lesser State ones...

You are part of the Republic's last line of defense - its Milita-at-Large - and this will be done to accomplish a "...well-regulated militia..."

What’s interesting is that most of these 'regulations' – if not all – would be in violation of the 4th, 5th, and 14th Amendments, in addition to the Second.

Indeed, this is about placing an undue burden on the Second Amendment right, measures enacted in bad faith not for reasons of public safety but out of an unwarranted animus toward gunowners.

The irony is that these measures would fail to pass Constitutional muster for the same reasons measures intended to deny same-sex couples access to state marriage laws and measures intended to compel women to give birth against their will failed to pass Constitutional muster.

 

[TRFjr]

...Cool now we can apply all those regs and restrictions to all of your other rights too...

We already do, with respect to driving and a number of other things... and, most other rights don't kill people.. killing tools (guns) are another matter.

driving isn't a right so the government has every authority to regulate it
the only right that when it is exercised a human is killed is the right you don't want to be regulated

 

[toobfreak]

It Was Done on Tobacco. It Can Be Done on Guns

WHAT was done on tobacco, Whackhota?

• Was it done to THIS tobacco?
  
• Or THIS tobacco?
  
• Or maybe THIS tobacco?
  
• Or perhaps THIS?
  
  
  
• I know! I bet it is THIS tobacco you were thinking of?
  

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

...We need to register and license all the news organizations.

We already do... the FCC does that for you...

Where can I find the FCC paperwork for the Chicago Tribune newspaper?

 

[Uncensored2008]

By Dennis A. Henigan

The American people can overcome the gun lobby, but only if we confront, and expose, three myths that have long dominated the gun debate and given the politicians a ready excuse for inaction.

First, we must not let the opponents of reform get away with the empty bromide that "guns don't kill people, people kill people." Does any rational person really believe that the Sandy Hook killer could have murdered twenty-seven people in minutes with a knife or a baseball bat? Guns enable people to kill, more effectively and efficiently than any other widely available weapon.

Second, we must challenge the idea that no law can prevent violent people from getting guns. This canard is refuted by the experience of every other western industrialized nation. Their violent crime rates are comparable to ours. But their homicide rates are exponentially lower because their strong gun laws make it harder for violent individuals to get guns.

Third, we must not accept the notion that our Constitution condemns us to the continued slaughter of our children. It is true that the Supreme Court has expanded gun rights in recent years; it is equally true that the Court has insisted that the right allows for reasonable restrictions. In his opinion in the Heller Second Amendment case, Justice Scalia listed restrictions on "dangerous and unusual weapons" among the kinds of gun laws that are still "presumptively lawful." Assault weapons that fire scores of rounds without reloading surely are "dangerous and unusual."

The tobacco control movement overcame some equally powerful mythology to fundamentally alter American attitudes toward tobacco products. The tobacco industry's effort to sow confusion and uncertainty about the link between smoking and disease eventually was exposed as a fraud. The entrenched view that smoking was simply a bad habit that individuals can choose to break was destroyed by evidence that the tobacco companies knew that nicotine was powerfully addictive and engineered their cigarettes to ensure that people got hooked and stayed hooked. The assumption that smoking harms only the smoker was contradicted by the overwhelming evidence of the danger of second-hand smoke.

Once these myths were exposed, attitudes changed, policies changed and we started saving countless lives. Since youth smoking peaked in the mid-1990s, smoking rates have fallen by about three-fourths among 8th graders, two-thirds among 10th graders and half among 12th graders. A sea change has occurred on the tobacco issue.

Similarly fundamental change can come to the gun issue as well. The myths about gun control, however, still have a hold on too many of our political leaders and their constituents. We will hear them repeated again and again in the coming weeks of intense debate. Every time we hear them, we must respond and we must persuade.

There is too much at stake to be silent.

More: Dennis A. Henigan: It Was Done on Tobacco. It Can Be Done on Guns

Well, good luck Nazi.

------------------------------------------------ just a comment but this 'henegin' guy is as lefty as can be gotten eh . He is an ENEMY of yours , mine and the USA !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Yep.

It's 1928 Berlin all over again. The left are the new Nazis, and whites are the new Jews. Everything is following the identical script. Shitting Bull is most likely a Brown Shirt out breaking windows and beating the elderly in Portland.

The question is if we will let it all happen again.

 

[Uncensored2008]

...There isn't a Constitution right to Tobacco. There is one for firearms

Oh, you'll get to keep firearm(s)... so there'll be no violation of your Constitutional rights.

It's just that you'll need a Class A or B or C or D -type license for various classes of weapons...

And you'll need to subject yourself to various levels of vetting and training and demonstrated expertise for any given Class of license...

And you'll need to "rinse and repeat" your application, training, etc, when periodically renewing each Class of license...

And you'll need to register each-and-every firearm in your possession...

And you'll be limited in the number of weapons of any given Class that you can own...

And you'll be limited in the amount of ammunition that you're allowed to have on-hand for any given weapon...

And you'll need to comply with firearms storage and transport standards...

And you'll be obliged to submit each and every proposed transfer of a firearm to proper vetting authorities empowered to grant Approval or Denial of same...

And you'll be subjected to temporary seizure of all firearms if you're charged with a felony...

And you'll be subjected to permanent seizure of all firearms and permanent revocation of all licensing if you are convicted of a violent felony...

All according to new Federal statutes that will past the Constitutional sniff-test; establishing Federal standards and bypassing lesser State ones...

You are part of the Republic's last line of defense - its Milita-at-Large - and this will be done to accomplish a "...well-regulated militia..."

Well, good luck with that Nazi.

Will you vile scum also institute a Class A or B or C or D -type license for speech?

Little doubt you would, if we gave up our guns and let you.

 

[Uncensored2008]

...We need to register and license all the news organizations.

We already do... the FCC does that for you...

False.

The FCC only has authority over that broadcast on the supposedly public airwaves. Print, internet, cable, satellite, social media, none of these are regulated.

Try again Nazi.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

...no can do my rights are not subject to your wishes and wants...

Correct. However, you are subject to future Law legislated and court-vetted on the subject, and that's coming soon enough, as history measures time.

...FYI well regulated means in working order as to be expected.

It means what The Law says it means, once legislated and challenged and reaffirmed by the courts.

nope you need to amend the 2nd amendment

 

[bigrebnc1775]

‘It is true that the Supreme Court has expanded gun rights in recent years; it is equally true that the Court has insisted that the right allows for reasonable restrictions. In his opinion in the Heller Second Amendment case, Justice Scalia listed restrictions on "dangerous and unusual weapons" among the kinds of gun laws that are still "presumptively lawful." Assault weapons that fire scores of rounds without reloading surely are "dangerous and unusual."’

Actually, it’s not true.

Guns don’t have ‘rights’ – people do; and the Supreme Court didn’t ‘expand’ anything.

The Heller Court acknowledged the fact that the Second Amendment recognizes an individual right to possess a firearm pursuant to lawful self-defense, unconnected with militia service.

And the Heller Court made no determination as to whether assault weapons were ‘dangerous and unusual,’ their possession outside of the scope of Second Amendment protections, or ‘in common use,’ where their possession is entitled to Second Amendment protections.

The Court may make such a determination sometime in the future, but current Second Amendment jurisprudence holds that assault weapons are ‘dangerous and unusual,’ their possession outside of the scope of Second Amendment protections.

The supreme court US.vs.Miller 1939 ruled that in order for a firearm to be protected by the second amendment, it must have some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well-regulated militia, in common use of the time, and supplied by the citizen.

Miller has been used as precedence in several recent Supreme court rulings

So tell me what firearm is there that is in common use that would have some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well-regulated militia?

C_Clayton_Jones tried to dodge this post.
The supreme court US.vs.Miller 1939 ruled that in order for a firearm to be protected by the second amendment, it must have some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well-regulated militia, in common use of the time, and supplied by the citizen.

Miller has been used as precedence in several recent Supreme court rulings

So tell me what firearm is there that is in common use that would have some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well-regulated militia?

 

[Lakhota]

...no can do my rights are not subject to your wishes and wants...

Correct. However, you are subject to future Law legislated and court-vetted on the subject, and that's coming soon enough, as history measures time.

...FYI well regulated means in working order as to be expected.

It means what The Law says it means, once legislated and challenged and reaffirmed by the courts.

nope you need to amend the 2nd amendment

No amendment necessary. The 2nd Amendment means whatever SCOTUS says it means at any given time.

 

[Uncensored2008]

...no can do my rights are not subject to your wishes and wants...

Correct. However, you are subject to future Law legislated and court-vetted on the subject, and that's coming soon enough, as history measures time.

...FYI well regulated means in working order as to be expected.

It means what The Law says it means, once legislated and challenged and reaffirmed by the courts.

nope you need to amend the 2nd amendment

No amendment necessary. The 2nd Amendment means whatever SCOTUS says it means at any given time.

Then this is a dictatorship and we have no obligation to follow any law, the social contract is null and void.

Thankfully, what you babble is utter bullshit.

 

[Lakhota]

...no can do my rights are not subject to your wishes and wants...

Correct. However, you are subject to future Law legislated and court-vetted on the subject, and that's coming soon enough, as history measures time.

...FYI well regulated means in working order as to be expected.

It means what The Law says it means, once legislated and challenged and reaffirmed by the courts.

nope you need to amend the 2nd amendment

No amendment necessary. The 2nd Amendment means whatever SCOTUS says it means at any given time.

Then this is a dictatorship and we have no obligation to follow any law, the social contract is null and void.

Thankfully, what you babble is utter bullshit.

Case law proves you wrong.

Supreme Court Cases on the Right to Keep and Bear Arms

 

[Uncensored2008]

...no can do my rights are not subject to your wishes and wants...

Correct. However, you are subject to future Law legislated and court-vetted on the subject, and that's coming soon enough, as history measures time.

...FYI well regulated means in working order as to be expected.

It means what The Law says it means, once legislated and challenged and reaffirmed by the courts.

nope you need to amend the 2nd amendment

No amendment necessary. The 2nd Amendment means whatever SCOTUS says it means at any given time.

Then this is a dictatorship and we have no obligation to follow any law, the social contract is null and void.

Thankfully, what you babble is utter bullshit.

Case law proves you wrong.

Supreme Court Cases on the Right to Keep and Bear Arms

You really are quite stupid.

Your own link refutes you, you should have read it.

{Nor can Congress deny to the people the right to keep and bear arms, nor the right to trial by jury, nor compel any one to be a witness against himself in a criminal proceeding. These powers, and others, in relation to rights of person, which it is not necessary here to enumerate, are, in express and positive terms,}

Dumb fake Indian...