CDZ Law abiding citizens should be able to carry a gun, open or concealed in any state...

[danielpalos]

Only for the People who are a well regulated militia, for the security needs of a free State.

Only the right wing, never gets it.

The right wing wants to eliminate sanctuary cities for illegals. 10USC311 is also federal law and enjoys federal supremacy.

the militia IS the people therefore the right of THE PEOPLE to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed

Only well regulated militia of the People are necessary.

non sequitur

it is completely sequitur, you simply don't understand the topic. your propaganda is not the law.

wow you really need to brush up on your grammar

you need to acquire and possess, a clue and a Cause.

 

[Skull Pilot]

No, that is not what it says. You are lying again.

yes, that is exactly what it means; i don't need to lie; i have a good argument.

no it's what you think it means

yes, this is what it means. You simply appeal to ignorance of the law, and are clueless and Causeless, as a result.

it says, well regulated militia of the People are necessary, and therefore, may not be Infringed when keeping and bearing arms for their State or the Union.

The People are the Militia.

Only illegals to 10USC311 call, jaywalkers across State lines without inspection, black.

it does not say a militia of the people it simply says militia. Well regulated in the vernacular of the 18th century did not mean government controlled it merely meant in good working order or disciplined.

The second makes no mention of why or for whom the people may keep and bear arms only that the peoples' right to do so shall not be infringed

just right wing fantasy?

The People are the Militia. Stop lying, fantastical Persons on the right wing.

You Idiot. I already said the people are the militia therefor the right of THE PEOPLE to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed

you think it's the militia that has the right to keep and bear arms

 

[Skull Pilot]

Where are you're numbers, since 2005 guns sales have increased and the drop in crime has coincided with that. Where are the gun control laws that coincide with drops in crime rates? Should be easy to look up. I've already posted my numbers

gun control laws have been around since 2005.

you are welcome prove which specific regulation improved auto safety.

been around a hell of a lot longer than that

yes, and gun safety statistics show it.

then tell me why do the cities with the harshest gun laws also have the most crime and murder while the states with the most relaxed gun laws have the least crime and murder

demographics.

a "rat race" analogy applies. it is why we need a fifteen dollar an hour minimum wage and fourteen dollars an hour for unemployment compensation in our at-will employment States.

So more gun laws don't equal less crime

 

[danielpalos]

yes, that is exactly what it means; i don't need to lie; i have a good argument.

no it's what you think it means

yes, this is what it means. You simply appeal to ignorance of the law, and are clueless and Causeless, as a result.

it says, well regulated militia of the People are necessary, and therefore, may not be Infringed when keeping and bearing arms for their State or the Union.

The People are the Militia.

Only illegals to 10USC311 call, jaywalkers across State lines without inspection, black.

it does not say a militia of the people it simply says militia. Well regulated in the vernacular of the 18th century did not mean government controlled it merely meant in good working order or disciplined.

The second makes no mention of why or for whom the people may keep and bear arms only that the peoples' right to do so shall not be infringed

just right wing fantasy?

The People are the Militia. Stop lying, fantastical Persons on the right wing.

You Idiot. I already said the people are the militia therefor the right of THE PEOPLE to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed

you think it's the militia that has the right to keep and bear arms

cognitive dissonance much? The People are the Militia. Well regulated Militia of the People are necessary to the security of a free State.

 

[danielpalos]

gun control laws have been around since 2005.

you are welcome prove which specific regulation improved auto safety.

been around a hell of a lot longer than that

yes, and gun safety statistics show it.

then tell me why do the cities with the harshest gun laws also have the most crime and murder while the states with the most relaxed gun laws have the least crime and murder

demographics.

a "rat race" analogy applies. it is why we need a fifteen dollar an hour minimum wage and fourteen dollars an hour for unemployment compensation in our at-will employment States.

So more gun laws don't equal less crime

is there less crime in other States, overall? if so, then more gun laws equal less crime and more safety.

 

[2aguy]

No....since we went from 4.7 million people carrying guns for self defense with most states not allowing it, to now every state having some form of carry ability and 15 million people, minimum, carrying guns for self defense......and not one law you point to that was passed in 1993 can be shown to have stopped criminals from getting guns......

yes; regulations account for the decrease, just like they do for auto safety.

Where are you're numbers, since 2005 guns sales have increased and the drop in crime has coincided with that. Where are the gun control laws that coincide with drops in crime rates? Should be easy to look up. I've already posted my numbers

gun control laws have been around since 2005.

you are welcome prove which specific regulation improved auto safety.

What...your post makes no sense in response to mine.

A. I have zero burden to prove specific auto regulation and how it improves auto safety not only because it's your argument you've been throwing out there, it's also a false equivalency, of which I stated many times. I never brought up regulations with auto safety, you did. Why would I go out and research it?

B. Gun control laws have been out much longer than 2005, what I cited was a correlation with a drop in crime to a steady and ongoing increased gun sales since 2005. There haven't been many gun control laws on a federal level enacted since then. The gun control laws on a city and state level, show an increase in crime after implementation. You've made zero counter point to this.

C. I'm not sure the actual numbers in auto regulations and auto safety would actually help you in this argument. Again I did not bring it up, you did, so be MY guest and look them up. But it is still a moot point since it is a false equivalency, and a completely different argument since there is not a constitutional amendment barring federal infringement on automobiles, which should be step one for you

D. You seemed to have dropped your argument that the 2nd was intended only for the militia, which is to be interpreted as the military in modern times. Again this should be step one for you, but you have made zero counterpoint to any of this, and have just spewed left wing talking points with no basis, of which I feel like I have fairly shut down as a viable argument...with actual proof.

only because you are clueless and Causeless; special pleading is for fullers of fallacy, not real men.

more people drive autos than ever before, and safety is improving. that is the analogy.

I have zero burden to believe gun lovers discover a greater love for morals simply due to more guns being around.

And it doesn't translate to guns.......guns have not had new safety features, and gun control laws have done nothing to keep guns out of the hands of criminals or mass shooters, the only thing that changed....more Americans are buying and carrying guns. So you are wrong again.

 

[2aguy]

been around a hell of a lot longer than that

yes, and gun safety statistics show it.

then tell me why do the cities with the harshest gun laws also have the most crime and murder while the states with the most relaxed gun laws have the least crime and murder

demographics.

a "rat race" analogy applies. it is why we need a fifteen dollar an hour minimum wage and fourteen dollars an hour for unemployment compensation in our at-will employment States.

So more gun laws don't equal less crime

is there less crime in other States, overall? if so, then more gun laws equal less crime and more safety.

again, wrong. It has become easier for law abiding people to carry guns...and the gun murder rate went down 47%....which ruins the entire anti gun argument for both simply owning guns at home and for actually carrying guns in public.

 

[Wry Catcher]

This should be obvious to anyone who understands the Constitution, the Bill of Rights and how we catch criminals.......if you are a law abiding citizen, you should be able to carry a gun either concealed or open......in any state in the union without fear of arrest or prosecution...why don't you anti gunners get that?

"law abiding"? Explain how you or anyone can identify who is and who is not law abiding?

• Never convicted of a violent felony
• Never convicted of a felony
• Never convicted of a violent misdemeanor
• Never convicted of domestic violence, child abuse, animal abuse
• Never committed a violent felony - how would you know (HWYK)
• Never committed a violent misdemeanor (HWYK)
• Never committed a misdemeanor (HWYK)
• Never been in a fist fight or threatened anyone? (HWYK)
• Never detained and found to be a danger to them self or others
• The Color of their skin, or their ethnicity
• Alcohol or drug abuser (HWYK)
• A childhood of abuse
• Gay or Lesbian
• Democrat, liberal, progressive or undecided
• Convicted of or committed an infraction - speeding, overtime parking, polluting the environment (dumping garbage on a pubic street or waterway)

Tell us Oh wise and wonderful lover of all guns and ammo, who would decide who should and who should never own, possess or have in their custody or control a deadly weapon?

BTW, If the 2nd A. is to be read and believed to mean no infringements, then all of the above are legally able to own, possess and have in their custody and control a gun - even a prisoner in a state or federal prison or on Parole or Probation.

 

[2aguy]

This should be obvious to anyone who understands the Constitution, the Bill of Rights and how we catch criminals.......if you are a law abiding citizen, you should be able to carry a gun either concealed or open......in any state in the union without fear of arrest or prosecution...why don't you anti gunners get that?

"law abiding"? Explain how you or anyone can identify who is and who is not law abiding?

• Never convicted of a violent felony
• Never convicted of a felony
• Never convicted of a violent misdemeanor
• Never convicted of domestic violence, child abuse, animal abuse
• Never committed a violent felony - how would you know (HWYK)
• Never committed a violent misdemeanor (HWYK)
• Never committed a misdemeanor (HWYK)
• Never been in a fist fight or threatened anyone? (HWYK)
• Never detained and found to be a danger to them self or others
• The Color of their skin, or their ethnicity
• Alcohol or drug abuser (HWYK)
• A childhood of abuse
• Gay or Lesbian
• Democrat, liberal, progressive or undecided
• Convicted of or committed an infraction - speeding, overtime parking, polluting the environment (dumping garbage on a pubic street or waterway)

Tell us Oh wise and wonderful lover of all guns and ammo, who would decide who should and who should never own, possess or have in their custody or control a deadly weapon?

BTW, If the 2nd A. is to be read and believed to mean no infringements, then all of the above are legally able to own, possess and have in their custody and control a gun - even a prisoner in a state or federal prison or on Parole or Probation.

Asswipe.......90% of those who murder have prior histories of crime and violence....the majority are convicted felons....asswipe..that's how......


The shootings in Chicago over Christmas.....90% of those involved were gang members that is how moron...

The lie you morons keep pushing...that normal, law abiding people become killers simply because they have a gun in the home is a lie......actual research shows this....and I have linked to that research in the past....

The problem in Chicago isn't normal, law abiding people...it is the gang banger who has multiple.....read again.....multiple convictions for illegal gun possession before they actually get caught murdering someone............


Gang Killers In Chicago Used Christmas Gatherings To Target Their Victims


"Ninety percent of those fatally wounded had gang affiliations, criminal histories and were pre-identified by the department's strategic subject algorithm as being a potential suspect or victim of gun violence," Guglielmi said.

 

[2aguy]

This should be obvious to anyone who understands the Constitution, the Bill of Rights and how we catch criminals.......if you are a law abiding citizen, you should be able to carry a gun either concealed or open......in any state in the union without fear of arrest or prosecution...why don't you anti gunners get that?

"law abiding"? Explain how you or anyone can identify who is and who is not law abiding?

• Never convicted of a violent felony
• Never convicted of a felony
• Never convicted of a violent misdemeanor
• Never convicted of domestic violence, child abuse, animal abuse
• Never committed a violent felony - how would you know (HWYK)
• Never committed a violent misdemeanor (HWYK)
• Never committed a misdemeanor (HWYK)
• Never been in a fist fight or threatened anyone? (HWYK)
• Never detained and found to be a danger to them self or others
• The Color of their skin, or their ethnicity
• Alcohol or drug abuser (HWYK)
• A childhood of abuse
• Gay or Lesbian
• Democrat, liberal, progressive or undecided
• Convicted of or committed an infraction - speeding, overtime parking, polluting the environment (dumping garbage on a pubic street or waterway)

Tell us Oh wise and wonderful lover of all guns and ammo, who would decide who should and who should never own, possess or have in their custody or control a deadly weapon?

BTW, If the 2nd A. is to be read and believed to mean no infringements, then all of the above are legally able to own, possess and have in their custody and control a gun - even a prisoner in a state or federal prison or on Parole or Probation.

And more info that shows you are clueless....

Roy Exum: How We Stop The Bullets

David Kennedy, a renowned criminal justice professor and co-chair of the National Network for Safe Communities, believes that places like the 1500 block of East 50th Street where Deontrey was killed, or Central Avenue where two other Chattanoogans were shot around the same time, aren’t necessarily bad areas. Good people live in those areas, just as the overwhelming numbers of those who live in our inner city are decent and law-abiding citizens.
No, our new focus isn’t on neighborhoods like Alton Park or East Chattanooga but instead on “hot” places” and “hot” people. In an article entitled, “The Story Behind the Nation’s Falling Body Count,” Kennedy writes, “Research on hot spots shows violence to be concentrated in ‘micro’ places, rather than ‘dangerous neighborhoods,’ as the popular idea goes. Blocks, corners, and buildings representing just five or six percent of an entire city will drive half of its serious crime.”
The same is true about people. “We now know that homicide and gun violence are overwhelmingly concentrated among serious offenders operating in groups: gangs, drug crews, and the like representing under half of one percent of a city's population who commit half to three-quarters of all murders.”
Read it once more: “ … under half of one percent … commit half to three-quarters of all murders.”
It is vitally important for us to realize the recent “worst of the worst” roundup had very little to do with race, yet to the uninformed it clearly appeared that only blacks were targeted.
Try to forget that all were black and focus instead on the far greater fact – there is ample evidence that each is alleged to be a serious criminal.
Kennedy writes, “We also know some reliable predictors of risk: individuals who have a history of violence or a close connection with prior victims are far more likely to be involved in violence themselves.
Hot groups and people are so hot that when their offending is statistically abstracted, their neighborhoods cease to be dangerous. Their communities aren't dangerous; (these criminals) are.”

 

[2aguy]

This should be obvious to anyone who understands the Constitution, the Bill of Rights and how we catch criminals.......if you are a law abiding citizen, you should be able to carry a gun either concealed or open......in any state in the union without fear of arrest or prosecution...why don't you anti gunners get that?

"law abiding"? Explain how you or anyone can identify who is and who is not law abiding?

• Never convicted of a violent felony
• Never convicted of a felony
• Never convicted of a violent misdemeanor
• Never convicted of domestic violence, child abuse, animal abuse
• Never committed a violent felony - how would you know (HWYK)
• Never committed a violent misdemeanor (HWYK)
• Never committed a misdemeanor (HWYK)
• Never been in a fist fight or threatened anyone? (HWYK)
• Never detained and found to be a danger to them self or others
• The Color of their skin, or their ethnicity
• Alcohol or drug abuser (HWYK)
• A childhood of abuse
• Gay or Lesbian
• Democrat, liberal, progressive or undecided
• Convicted of or committed an infraction - speeding, overtime parking, polluting the environment (dumping garbage on a pubic street or waterway)

Tell us Oh wise and wonderful lover of all guns and ammo, who would decide who should and who should never own, possess or have in their custody or control a deadly weapon?

BTW, If the 2nd A. is to be read and believed to mean no infringements, then all of the above are legally able to own, possess and have in their custody and control a gun - even a prisoner in a state or federal prison or on Parole or Probation.

And more....

Public Health and Gun Control --- A Review (Part II: Gun Violence and Constitutional Issues) | Hacienda Publishing



That statement is contradicted by available data, government data. The fact is that the typical murderer has had a prior criminal history of at least six years with four felony arrests in his record before he finally commits murder.


(17) The FBI statistics reveal that 75 percent of all violent crimes for any locality are committed by six percent of hardened criminals and repeat offenders.(18)


Less than 2 percent of crimes committed with firearms are carried out by licensed (e.g., concealed carry permit holders) law-abiding citizens.(11)

Violent crimes continue to be a problem in the inner cities with gangs involved in the drug trade. Crimes in rural areas for both blacks and whites, despite the preponderance of guns in this setting, remain low.(11,19)



Gun availability does not cause crime. Prohibitionist government policies and gun control (rather than crime control) exacerbates the problem by making it more difficult for law-abiding citizens to defend themselves, their families, and their property. In fact, there was a modest increase in both homicide and suicide after prohibition and passage of the Gun Control Act of 1968.(20)

http://m.wcvb.com/news/brockton-man-arrested-a-third-time-in-15-months-on-gun-charges/37728640

 

[Skull Pilot]

no it's what you think it means

yes, this is what it means. You simply appeal to ignorance of the law, and are clueless and Causeless, as a result.

it says, well regulated militia of the People are necessary, and therefore, may not be Infringed when keeping and bearing arms for their State or the Union.

The People are the Militia.

Only illegals to 10USC311 call, jaywalkers across State lines without inspection, black.

it does not say a militia of the people it simply says militia. Well regulated in the vernacular of the 18th century did not mean government controlled it merely meant in good working order or disciplined.

The second makes no mention of why or for whom the people may keep and bear arms only that the peoples' right to do so shall not be infringed

just right wing fantasy?

The People are the Militia. Stop lying, fantastical Persons on the right wing.

You Idiot. I already said the people are the militia therefor the right of THE PEOPLE to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed

you think it's the militia that has the right to keep and bear arms

cognitive dissonance much? The People are the Militia. Well regulated Militia of the People are necessary to the security of a free State.

So why do you want to restrict the people from having arms?

You're the one advocating that we make it harder for the people (the militia) to keep and bear arms so YOU are arguing for the weakening of the security of the free state

 

[Skull Pilot]

been around a hell of a lot longer than that

yes, and gun safety statistics show it.

then tell me why do the cities with the harshest gun laws also have the most crime and murder while the states with the most relaxed gun laws have the least crime and murder

demographics.

a "rat race" analogy applies. it is why we need a fifteen dollar an hour minimum wage and fourteen dollars an hour for unemployment compensation in our at-will employment States.

So more gun laws don't equal less crime

is there less crime in other States, overall? if so, then more gun laws equal less crime and more safety.

Murder rate in Some cities like Detroit or Oakland alone are higher than the murder rate of entire states

 

[TipOfTheIceberg]

This should be obvious to anyone who understands the Constitution, the Bill of Rights and how we catch criminals.......if you are a law abiding citizen, you should be able to carry a gun either concealed or open......in any state in the union without fear of arrest or prosecution...why don't you anti gunners get that?

"law abiding"? Explain how you or anyone can identify who is and who is not law abiding?

• Never convicted of a violent felony
• Never convicted of a felony
• Never convicted of a violent misdemeanor
• Never convicted of domestic violence, child abuse, animal abuse
• Never committed a violent felony - how would you know (HWYK)
• Never committed a violent misdemeanor (HWYK)
• Never committed a misdemeanor (HWYK)
• Never been in a fist fight or threatened anyone? (HWYK)
• Never detained and found to be a danger to them self or others
• The Color of their skin, or their ethnicity
• Alcohol or drug abuser (HWYK)
• A childhood of abuse
• Gay or Lesbian
• Democrat, liberal, progressive or undecided
• Convicted of or committed an infraction - speeding, overtime parking, polluting the environment (dumping garbage on a pubic street or waterway)

Tell us Oh wise and wonderful lover of all guns and ammo, who would decide who should and who should never own, possess or have in their custody or control a deadly weapon?

BTW, If the 2nd A. is to be read and believed to mean no infringements, then all of the above are legally able to own, possess and have in their custody and control a gun - even a prisoner in a state or federal prison or on Parole or Probation.

By their color? [just kidding]. You rock, man.

 

[TipOfTheIceberg]

This should be obvious to anyone who understands the Constitution, the Bill of Rights and how we catch criminals.......if you are a law abiding citizen, you should be able to carry a gun either concealed or open......in any state in the union without fear of arrest or prosecution...why don't you anti gunners get that?

"law abiding"? Explain how you or anyone can identify who is and who is not law abiding?

• Never convicted of a violent felony
• Never convicted of a felony
• Never convicted of a violent misdemeanor
• Never convicted of domestic violence, child abuse, animal abuse
• Never committed a violent felony - how would you know (HWYK)
• Never committed a violent misdemeanor (HWYK)
• Never committed a misdemeanor (HWYK)
• Never been in a fist fight or threatened anyone? (HWYK)
• Never detained and found to be a danger to them self or others
• The Color of their skin, or their ethnicity
• Alcohol or drug abuser (HWYK)
• A childhood of abuse
• Gay or Lesbian
• Democrat, liberal, progressive or undecided
• Convicted of or committed an infraction - speeding, overtime parking, polluting the environment (dumping garbage on a pubic street or waterway)

Tell us Oh wise and wonderful lover of all guns and ammo, who would decide who should and who should never own, possess or have in their custody or control a deadly weapon?

BTW, If the 2nd A. is to be read and believed to mean no infringements, then all of the above are legally able to own, possess and have in their custody and control a gun - even a prisoner in a state or federal prison or on Parole or Probation.

Asswipe.......90% of those who murder have prior histories of crime and violence....the majority are convicted felons....asswipe..that's how......


The shootings in Chicago over Christmas.....90% of those involved were gang members that is how moron...

The lie you morons keep pushing...that normal, law abiding people become killers simply because they have a gun in the home is a lie......actual research shows this....and I have linked to that research in the past....

The problem in Chicago isn't normal, law abiding people...it is the gang banger who has multiple.....read again.....multiple convictions for illegal gun possession before they actually get caught murdering someone............


Gang Killers In Chicago Used Christmas Gatherings To Target Their Victims


"Ninety percent of those fatally wounded had gang affiliations, criminal histories and were pre-identified by the department's strategic subject algorithm as being a potential suspect or victim of gun violence," Guglielmi said.

Am I in the clean debates forum or am I lost in cyber space like a horse with no name? Arrg!

 

[Wry Catcher]

As the man said, there are liars, damn liars and statistics. Something to keep in mind when reading, if anyone does - the baffle them with bullshit - posts of 2aguy.

 

[sakinago]

No, that is not what it says. You are lying again.

Again if your questioning the meaning of the 2nd, look up what the founders said about it at the time, it's that simple. Also see how it was put into practice at the time...BTW your English is getting much better Muhammad. I've already posted writings from the founders at the time

The People are the Militia. Well regulated Militia of the whole and entire People are declared necessary to the security of a free State, not the unorganized militia of the People.

Yes, and not only that, try and pin down who they meant when they refer to 'the people'. Hint: It didn't mean everybody, it meant a select few, and that's how state laws meant the term, too.

No, the militia (civilian operated) was supposed to keep both the government , and the regular military in check.

This will be the third freaking time I'm posting this. See 47.4 and 47.7 if your truly wondering what the founders intentions were

Jefferson on Politics & Government: The Military

And so what? What did Jefferson use Federal troops for in his second term? You confuse political rhetoric at some point in time for expediency for what he really believed and practiced, as did many another 'Founder', when it came to existential needs. And as it turned out, relying on such haphazard things as 'state militias' was abandoned in favor of standing armies and navies, as a practical necessity. Even the Southern Confederacy had to face this fact when they tried to organize a defense against Lincoln's invasions

What? What are you talking about. I can't even follow your straw man here because it makes no sense. I'm assuming you didn't even read the article. Are you suggesting Jefferson wanted a militia in place of a uniform military?

 

[Skull Pilot]

As the man said, there are liars, damn liars and statistics. Something to keep in mind when reading, if anyone does - the baffle them with bullshit - posts of 2aguy.

you are free to refute anything posted with evidence of your own

 

[2aguy]

As the man said, there are liars, damn liars and statistics. Something to keep in mind when reading, if anyone does - the baffle them with bullshit - posts of 2aguy.

My links are from the CDC, FBI, and actual researchers on crime.......but go ahead....talk out of your ass.......but even Jim Carrey couldn't make that interesting....

 

[danielpalos]

yes, and gun safety statistics show it.

then tell me why do the cities with the harshest gun laws also have the most crime and murder while the states with the most relaxed gun laws have the least crime and murder

demographics.

a "rat race" analogy applies. it is why we need a fifteen dollar an hour minimum wage and fourteen dollars an hour for unemployment compensation in our at-will employment States.

So more gun laws don't equal less crime

is there less crime in other States, overall? if so, then more gun laws equal less crime and more safety.

again, wrong. It has become easier for law abiding people to carry guns...and the gun murder rate went down 47%....which ruins the entire anti gun argument for both simply owning guns at home and for actually carrying guns in public.

we have more gun control laws, not less; and gun control laws are being considered, all the time.

we have safer cars now; not drivers with better morals.