Keeping guns from criminals - liberals, what is your plan?

[kaz]

Really? The people at Virginia Tech, Columbine, Aurora, Sandy Hook, The Washington Navy Yard and so on will find that interesting. Or they would if they were not dead because they were unarmed.

That in theory you can own a gun but laws prevent you from having it when you are being shot at aren't any different than just banning the guns to begin with. You're an idiot that you would even say that, and you insult anyone else's intelligence, classic

Do you actually believe every citizen needs to be armed with gun, at all times?

No one does. What the second amendment says is that every citizen has the RIGHT to be armed with a gun, at all times.

Every citizen? At All times? Are you sure? And, does that make any sense at all?

First of all, you understand the difference between these statements, no?

WryCatcher - Do you actually believe every citizen needs to be armed with gun, at all times?

Ernie S - What the second amendment says is that every citizen has the RIGHT to be armed with a gun, at all times

Second, you don't have a right to do what you want on other people's property, so you have a right to be armed when you are on your own or in public. You don't have a right on other people's property, and government can restrict guns on government property for government use. In other words, they can restrict guns for example in government buildings like courts, but they cannot restrict guns on streets or in parks

Except force them to make a cake celebrating gay marriage, of course. ;-)

Well yes, then it's OK

 

[kaz]

Really? The people at Virginia Tech, Columbine, Aurora, Sandy Hook, The Washington Navy Yard and so on will find that interesting. Or they would if they were not dead because they were unarmed.

That in theory you can own a gun but laws prevent you from having it when you are being shot at aren't any different than just banning the guns to begin with. You're an idiot that you would even say that, and you insult anyone else's intelligence, classic

Do you actually believe every citizen needs to be armed with gun, at all times?

No one does. What the second amendment says is that every citizen has the RIGHT to be armed with a gun, at all times.

No, it doesn't. It says that the People who are a well regulated militia may not be Infringed when keeping and bearing Arms for their State or the Union to ensure the security needs of a free State.

No, it says that "A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state" and then goes on to say that "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

It never says that the people must be in a militia.

The People are the Militia. Only well regulated militias of the People are necessary to the security of a free State and may not be Infringed as a result.

If you understand what you just said, you finally got it, but I'm questioning that. So just to confirm, do any people not have the right to bear arms?

 

[M14 Shooter]

Do you actually believe every citizen needs to be armed with gun, at all times?

No one does. What the second amendment says is that every citizen has the RIGHT to be armed with a gun, at all times.

No, it doesn't. It says that the People who are a well regulated militia may not be Infringed when keeping and bearing Arms for their State or the Union to ensure the security needs of a free State.

No, it says that "A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state" and then goes on to say that "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

It never says that the people must be in a militia.

The People are the Militia. Only well regulated militias of the People are necessary to the security of a free State and may not be Infringed as a result.

If you understand what you just said, you finally got it, but I'm questioning that. So just to confirm, do any people not have the right to bear arms?

He's lying to you .
He knows it and he doesn't care.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Their is an active militia and an inactive militia. The former is the national guard, the latter all men between the age of 18 and 45 eligible for a draft. Middle aged fat guys like M14 running around the woods with guns ain't members.

 

[kaz]

Their is an active militia and an inactive militia. The former is the national guard, the latter all men between the age of 18 and 45 eligible for a draft. Middle aged fat guys like M14 running around the woods with guns ain't members.

Right, so in the bill of rights protecting personal freedoms, they decided to ensure that ... government ... can have guns.

How stupid are you?

 

[M14 Shooter]

Their is an active militia and an inactive militia. The former is the national guard, the latter all men between the age of 18 and 45 eligible for a draft. Middle aged fat guys like M14 running around the woods with guns ain't members.

Oh look... WC is unhappy because he knows he cannot have an open and honest debate on gun control; to fill this void, he finds a need to petulantly lash out at the person who he knows will best him each and every time he tries.
It doesn't matter how much you stomp your feet and how much snot runs from your nose -- you know you cannot debate the issue honestly ans openly.

 

[Ernie S.]

Their is an active militia and an inactive militia. The former is the national guard, the latter all men between the age of 18 and 45 eligible for a draft. Middle aged fat guys like M14 running around the woods with guns ain't members.

Right, so in the bill of rights protecting personal freedoms, they decided to ensure that ... government ... can have guns.

How stupid are you?

Impossible to estimate.....

 

[M14 Shooter]

Their is an active militia and an inactive militia. The former is the national guard, the latter all men between the age of 18 and 45 eligible for a draft. Middle aged fat guys like M14 running around the woods with guns ain't members.

Right, so in the bill of rights protecting personal freedoms, they decided to ensure that ... government ... can have guns.
How stupid are you?

He chooses to be wrong.
He chooses to believe that The Second Amendment does NOT protect an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home.
He chooses to believe that sine Heller was 5-4 it is somehow meaningless while at the same time he chooses to ignore .DC v Heller was a 5-4 split decision... US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum
He knows he can only argue from emotion, ignorance and/or dishonesty; he knows he is a useful idiot.

 

[danielpalos]

Do you actually believe every citizen needs to be armed with gun, at all times?

No one does. What the second amendment says is that every citizen has the RIGHT to be armed with a gun, at all times.

No, it doesn't. It says that the People who are a well regulated militia may not be Infringed when keeping and bearing Arms for their State or the Union to ensure the security needs of a free State.

No, it says that "A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state" and then goes on to say that "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

It never says that the people must be in a militia.

The People are the Militia. Only well regulated militias of the People are necessary to the security of a free State and may not be Infringed as a result.

If you understand what you just said, you finally got it, but I'm questioning that. So just to confirm, do any people not have the right to bear arms?

Yes, I understand Paragraph (2) of DC v Heller which describes which Individuals of the People may be Infringed.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Their is an active militia and an inactive militia. The former is the national guard, the latter all men between the age of 18 and 45 eligible for a draft. Middle aged fat guys like M14 running around the woods with guns ain't members.

Right, so in the bill of rights protecting personal freedoms, they decided to ensure that ... government ... can have guns.

How stupid are you?

Militia Act of 1903 - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Q. How stupid are you

A. At least two standard deviations above your level

 

[M14 Shooter]

Their is an active militia and an inactive militia. The former is the national guard, the latter all men between the age of 18 and 45 eligible for a draft. Middle aged fat guys like M14 running around the woods with guns ain't members.

Right, so in the bill of rights protecting personal freedoms, they decided to ensure that ... government ... can have guns.
How stupid are you?

Militia Act of 1903 - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia
Q. How stupid are you
A. At least two standard deviations above your level

Says the guy who posts a link that does nothing to support his position or undermine that of the person he responded to.

 

[danielpalos]

It also provided federal funds to the National Guard to pay for equipment and training, including annual summer encampments.

Arms are socialized not Only in our Constitution but also by the precedent of Congressional public Acts.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Their is an active militia and an inactive militia. The former is the national guard, the latter all men between the age of 18 and 45 eligible for a draft. Middle aged fat guys like M14 running around the woods with guns ain't members.

Right, so in the bill of rights protecting personal freedoms, they decided to ensure that ... government ... can have guns.
How stupid are you?

Militia Act of 1903 - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia
Q. How stupid are you
A. At least two standard deviations above your level

Says the guy who posts a link that does nothing to support his position or undermine that of the person he responded to.

Will playing with your boyfriends in the woods, do you wear Tiddie Whities under your camouflage outfit, or camouflage underwear to match.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Their is an active militia and an inactive militia. The former is the national guard, the latter all men between the age of 18 and 45 eligible for a draft. Middle aged fat guys like M14 running around the woods with guns ain't members.

Right, so in the bill of rights protecting personal freedoms, they decided to ensure that ... government ... can have guns.
How stupid are you?

Militia Act of 1903 - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia
Q. How stupid are you
A. At least two standard deviations above your level

Says the guy who posts a link that does nothing to support his position or undermine that of the person he responded to.

Will playing with your boyfriends in the woods, do you wear Tiddie Whities under your camouflage outfit, or camouflage underwear to match.

Thank you for continuing to help prove that anti-gun loons can only argue from emotion, ignorance and/or dishonesty.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Their is an active militia and an inactive militia. The former is the national guard, the latter all men between the age of 18 and 45 eligible for a draft. Middle aged fat guys like M14 running around the woods with guns ain't members.

Right, so in the bill of rights protecting personal freedoms, they decided to ensure that ... government ... can have guns.
How stupid are you?

Militia Act of 1903 - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia
Q. How stupid are you
A. At least two standard deviations above your level

Says the guy who posts a link that does nothing to support his position or undermine that of the person he responded to.

Will playing with your boyfriends in the woods, do you wear Tiddie Whities under your camouflage outfit, or camouflage underwear to match.

Thank you for continuing to help prove that anti-gun loons can only argue from emotion, ignorance and/or dishonesty.

I simply asked a question. In any event, when you or one of your boyfriends shoots you in the ass, I hope for your sake your undergarments are clean.

 

[bendog]

Every time there's a shooting, liberals run around saying this proves we need more gun laws. I ask liberals over and over how exactly you are going to keep guns out of the hands of criminals every time you say you want more gun laws.

In particular, address given that drugs are illegal, and yet any parent knows any kid can get as much pot as they want. There are millions of guns in the US, millions more in the world. So don't just say more laws, explain how more laws are going to actually work.

So, there have been 7 shootings killing at least 10 people in the last decade. The only thing you've achieved so far is that no one was shooting back.

Well, I'm not a liberal, but I think overall the best tool has been enhanced sentencing for gun crimes. Still, I've never seen opposition to background check being rational. If it stops 1-100 shootings .... great. And, I don't really know how to do it, but the US is not identifying the truly insane in society as well as we should.

 

[kaz]

No one does. What the second amendment says is that every citizen has the RIGHT to be armed with a gun, at all times.

No, it doesn't. It says that the People who are a well regulated militia may not be Infringed when keeping and bearing Arms for their State or the Union to ensure the security needs of a free State.

No, it says that "A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state" and then goes on to say that "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

It never says that the people must be in a militia.

The People are the Militia. Only well regulated militias of the People are necessary to the security of a free State and may not be Infringed as a result.

If you understand what you just said, you finally got it, but I'm questioning that. So just to confirm, do any people not have the right to bear arms?

Yes, I understand Paragraph (2) of DC v Heller which describes which Individuals of the People may be Infringed.

Right, the bill of rights is about government's right to infringe on our rights, makes perfect sense, thanks for that Canadian explanation. Eh?

So they are really the bill of suggestions?

 

[Wry Catcher]

Every time there's a shooting, liberals run around saying this proves we need more gun laws. I ask liberals over and over how exactly you are going to keep guns out of the hands of criminals every time you say you want more gun laws.

In particular, address given that drugs are illegal, and yet any parent knows any kid can get as much pot as they want. There are millions of guns in the US, millions more in the world. So don't just say more laws, explain how more laws are going to actually work.

So, there have been 7 shootings killing at least 10 people in the last decade. The only thing you've achieved so far is that no one was shooting back.

Well, I'm not a liberal, but I think overall the best tool has been enhanced sentencing for gun crimes. Still, I've never seen opposition to background check being rational. If it stops 1-100 shootings .... great. And, I don't really know how to do it, but the US is not identifying the truly insane in society as well as we should.

The problem is the gun lovers have no interest in being rational or discussing ways in which to control guns. They simply respond, "nothing will work" and any effort to do so will violate my rights under the Second Amendment.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Right, so in the bill of rights protecting personal freedoms, they decided to ensure that ... government ... can have guns.
How stupid are you?

Militia Act of 1903 - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia
Q. How stupid are you
A. At least two standard deviations above your level

Says the guy who posts a link that does nothing to support his position or undermine that of the person he responded to.

Will playing with your boyfriends in the woods, do you wear Tiddie Whities under your camouflage outfit, or camouflage underwear to match.

Thank you for continuing to help prove that anti-gun loons can only argue from emotion, ignorance and/or dishonesty.

I simply asked a question. In any event, when you or one of your boyfriends shoots you in the ass, I hope for your sake your undergarments are clean.

Thank you for continuing to help prove that anti-gun loons can only argue from emotion, ignorance and/or dishonesty

 

[M14 Shooter]

Every time there's a shooting, liberals run around saying this proves we need more gun laws. I ask liberals over and over how exactly you are going to keep guns out of the hands of criminals every time you say you want more gun laws.

In particular, address given that drugs are illegal, and yet any parent knows any kid can get as much pot as they want. There are millions of guns in the US, millions more in the world. So don't just say more laws, explain how more laws are going to actually work.

So, there have been 7 shootings killing at least 10 people in the last decade. The only thing you've achieved so far is that no one was shooting back.

Well, I'm not a liberal, but I think overall the best tool has been enhanced sentencing for gun crimes. Still, I've never seen opposition to background check being rational. If it stops 1-100 shootings .... great. And, I don't really know how to do it, but the US is not identifying the truly insane in society as well as we should.

The problem is the gun lovers have no interest in being rational or discussing ways in which to control guns.

This is a lie.
Disagree?
There's a link in my sig to that very conversation, the one you tucked tail and ran from.