Let's get specific on the politics of GUN CONTROL

[frigidweirdo]

No, you're wrong. The whole point of the 2A is so the militia would have a ready supply of weapons, and weapons that would be useful for the militia. Guns that aren't safe, guns that don't work properly etc etc aren't protected.
An individual can't have a nuclear weapon, for example. Why not? Because it's not a usual militia weapon and also it doesn't meet the requirements of what the militia is all about.

As long as individuals are able to own militia type weapons, then the govt hasn't done anything wrong. The limitation on power merely prevents the US govt stopping people being able to own arms, not stopping them owning ALL TYPES of arms.

The whole point is the amendment is designed to make sure individuals can have weapons so the militia has a ready supply, but not to give the individuals the right to own EVERY type of weapon.

There is a fine line between what is and what isn't acceptable as a weapon, and who decides is based on what the govt says in the first place. That doesn't mean it's an open ended book.

Repeating your error won't make it true. The people have the right to bear arms, there's a 230 year discussion on why, only lately do post modern liberals think they've unveiled the real truth. The people tell the government what they want, Fuckhead, NOT the other way around!

I didn't say the people didn't have a right to bear arms. In fact I said people DO have a right to bear arms. So, me "repeating" my "error" is in fact you making stuff up about what I said.

What I did say was that the US govt has basically annulled 2A on this because they have simply made an "unorganized militia" and said that all men are in it (seems women don't give a stuff if they're in it or not) and therefore the US govt isn't taking away your right to bear arms.

The equivalent would be the US govt giving every male aged 18-45 a paper gun that doesn't fire, and then everyone being happy that they have a gun.

Yes, you repeatedly said stupid shit, that's called an error. You said :
"The whole point is the amendment is designed to make sure individuals can have weapons so the militia has a ready supply..."

That's wrong and it's been pointed out many times. There's no reason to say a militia has the right to bear arms, a militia is armed by definition. Then there's that word that confuses post modern liberals, "people". They can't figure out what it means.

What I love about your post is that you say it's wrong, and the reason you give for it being wrong is that "it has been pointed out many times", as if someone saying something enough times makes it true.

I'm sorry, but that's nonsense.

Also, I didn't say the militia has the right to bear arms. I don't know where you're making this stuff up from, but I'd prefer it if you ACTUALLY READ WHAT THE FUCK I WRITE, instead of deciding what I've written based on what other people say.

So, go read my posts and then come back to me when you've actually bothered to understand what I wrote.

I said it's been pointed out many times to demonstrate that you're an idiot, not for the reasons you think. And you can't read, I said a militia is armed by definition. They included the word people for a reason, that apparently is beyond your grasp. It was argued all the way up the SCOTUS even though is was never a mystery.

Oh, now you're onto the personal insults. Why is it that you need to resort to insults. You haven't proven anything. Well, bye.

 

[Iceweasel]

Repeating your error won't make it true. The people have the right to bear arms, there's a 230 year discussion on why, only lately do post modern liberals think they've unveiled the real truth. The people tell the government what they want, Fuckhead, NOT the other way around!

I didn't say the people didn't have a right to bear arms. In fact I said people DO have a right to bear arms. So, me "repeating" my "error" is in fact you making stuff up about what I said.

What I did say was that the US govt has basically annulled 2A on this because they have simply made an "unorganized militia" and said that all men are in it (seems women don't give a stuff if they're in it or not) and therefore the US govt isn't taking away your right to bear arms.

The equivalent would be the US govt giving every male aged 18-45 a paper gun that doesn't fire, and then everyone being happy that they have a gun.

Yes, you repeatedly said stupid shit, that's called an error. You said :
"The whole point is the amendment is designed to make sure individuals can have weapons so the militia has a ready supply..."

That's wrong and it's been pointed out many times. There's no reason to say a militia has the right to bear arms, a militia is armed by definition. Then there's that word that confuses post modern liberals, "people". They can't figure out what it means.

What I love about your post is that you say it's wrong, and the reason you give for it being wrong is that "it has been pointed out many times", as if someone saying something enough times makes it true.

I'm sorry, but that's nonsense.

Also, I didn't say the militia has the right to bear arms. I don't know where you're making this stuff up from, but I'd prefer it if you ACTUALLY READ WHAT THE FUCK I WRITE, instead of deciding what I've written based on what other people say.

So, go read my posts and then come back to me when you've actually bothered to understand what I wrote.

I said it's been pointed out many times to demonstrate that you're an idiot, not for the reasons you think. And you can't read, I said a militia is armed by definition. They included the word people for a reason, that apparently is beyond your grasp. It was argued all the way up the SCOTUS even though is was never a mystery.

Oh, now you're onto the personal insults. Why is it that you need to resort to insults. You haven't proven anything. Well, bye.

You like to insult people then get a case of the ass when they give it back? Yes, I proved you don't understand the 2nd Amendment. 230 years of seeing it one way then you pop in to let us know they're all wrong.

 

[MaryL]

I totally support the second Amendment. But I choose NOT to own a gun, is that OK with you people? Because, I am not seeing anyone being defended by firearms anymore, they (guns)
are the major threat. Gun violence is down? It's like the cancer rate is down, smoke more? Ah...no. I don't like lectures any more than the rest of you.

 

[frigidweirdo]

I totally support the second Amendment. But I choose NOT to own a gun, is that OK with you people? Because, I am not seeing anyone being defended by firearms anymore, they (guns)
are the major threat. Gun violence is down? It's like the cancer rate is down, smoke more? Ah...no. I don't like lectures any more than the rest of you.

What does "I totally support the second Amendment." mean exactly?

Depending on how you view it, it could change what you think you support drastically.

 

[MaryL]

Gun control specifics. Like... NO no guns anymore for the general public? That might be a beginning.I don't need a gun, and neither do the rest of you. Firearms, and the second Amendment, guaranteed. I NEED a car, though, but I hate it just as much as a gun, but it ISN'T guaranteed in bill of rights under transportation though. Times and needs change, let's adjust the constitution to the times. I like guns, kids. I like cars. People, we have problems with. Adjust the laws accordingly to the times.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Gun control specifics. Like... NO no guns anymore for the general public? That might be a beginning.I don't need a gun, and neither do the rest of you. Firearms, and the second Amendment, guaranteed. I NEED a car, though, but I hate it just as much as a gun, but it ISN'T guaranteed in bill of rights under transportation though. Times and needs change, let's adjust the constitution to the times. I like guns, kids. I like cars. People, we have problems with. Adjust the laws accordingly to the times.

Too many people have too much to lose for this to ever become popular opinion, especially on the right.

Firearm Industry Statistics | Statistic Brain

"Guns and ammunition manufacturing annual revenue $11,000,000,000"

You're looking at an $11 billion industry that would would simply lose their market over night.

"Number of people employed by the firearm manufacturing industry 35,165"

"Number of retail gun dealers 50,812"

85,000 people who'd lose their job or business.

These people aren't going to go down without a fight, they have the NRA behind them, the Republican Party behind them, dealing in a govt that it notorious for not getting things done.

Chances of this happening? Zero.

 

[Little-Acorn]

I choose NOT to own a gun, is that OK with you people? Because, I am not seeing anyone being defended by firearms anymore

Really? You're not?

Then you won't mind if your neighbor puts this sign on his lawn, pointing at your house:

 

[frigidweirdo]

I choose NOT to own a gun, is that OK with you people? Because, I am not seeing anyone being defended by firearms anymore

Really? You're not?

Then you won't mind if your neighbor puts this sign on his lawn, pointing at your house:

Would you want a sign on your neighbor's house lawn that says

"I'm not armed, and my next door neighbor is, but I don't have anything worth much, he has $100,000 worth of diamonds hidden in the sofa"?

 

[JoeB131]

Not if that government is tyrannical and going against the Constitution.....DUMBASS!

The Armed Forces are sworn to protect and defend the CONSTITUTION NOT THE GOVERNMENT.

You are one stupid fuck!

Who gets to determine when the government is acting against the constitution? You've pretty much just threw out the rule of law once you've decided that an individual, like those assholes in Oregon, are the ones who can make that call.

 

[JoeB131]

November 11, 1938 (the day after Kristallnacht) the Regulations Against Jews' Possession of Weapons were promulgated by Minister of the Interior, Wilhelm Frick, effectively depriving all Jews living under the Third Reich of the right to possess any form of weapons including truncheons, knives, or firearms and ammunition.[7]

Before that, some police forces used the pre-existing "trustworthiness" clause to disarm Jews on the basis that "the Jewish population 'cannot be regarded as trustworthy'".
Gun legislation in Germany - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The lack of guns were the LEAST of Germany's Jews problems.

The fact that Anti-semitism was hard-wired into German Culture for 1000 years was.

That's why Hitler started screaming about the Jews, and no one thought he was a crazy person.

 

[Norman]

So let me get this straight. A person with access to the most guns, explosives and nuclear warheads this planet has ever seen, along with constant security patrols, is telling everyone else they can't even have a firearm to protect themselves with?

Perfect regressive logic...

 

[Stephanie]

SNIP:
Obama, Davis Ask Supreme Court to Reject Texas Abortion Law

ALL of it here;
Obama, Davis Ask Supreme Court to Reject Texas Abortion Law

 

[Iceweasel]

Too many people have too much to lose for this to ever become popular opinion, especially on the right.

Firearm Industry Statistics | Statistic Brain

"Guns and ammunition manufacturing annual revenue $11,000,000,000"

You're looking at an $11 billion industry that would would simply lose their market over night.

"Number of people employed by the firearm manufacturing industry 35,165"

"Number of retail gun dealers 50,812"

85,000 people who'd lose their job or business.

These people aren't going to go down without a fight, they have the NRA behind them, the Republican Party behind them, dealing in a govt that it notorious for not getting things done.

Chances of this happening? Zero.

And none of your diatribe has anything to do with the problem. You're the zero. It's a societal problem, not a manufacturing problem. Liberals can't see, they can only feel their way through life. We should treat nuts like nuts and get them off the streets and quit expecting drugs to solve the it. Violent offenders need to be put away. Children need to be taught accountability and personal responsibility, not victimhood. We need to reject liberalism and it's destructive forces where ever we find it. Passing meaningless legislation pleases only the left, it solves nothing.

 

[JoeB131]

View attachment 59061

SNIP:
Obama, Davis Ask Supreme Court to Reject Texas Abortion Law

ALL of it here;
Obama, Davis Ask Supreme Court to Reject Texas Abortion Law

Fetuses aren't babies, Staph. If you have a problem with that, take it up with the 40 million women who've had them.

 

[Stephanie]

what? shouldn't all this have stopped as soon as that Dear Leader shed some tears while imposing his jackboots on the rest of our necks? this just can't be. you see folks they won't go after the gangbangers, criminals, etc. just you LEGAL gun owners
snip:
12 shot in Chicago on day Obama calls for action to end gun violence
By CNN

Before President Barack Obama could officially announce his proposals to help curb gun violence two people had already been shot in his hometown of Chicago that day. About an hour after Obama spoke Tuesday, before pundits and candidates were done breaking down the proposals, it would rise to three.

By the end of the day, 12 people had been shot and four were dead. Not a single person was in custody in connection with any of the shootings as of midday Wednesday. This type of violence is precisely what Obama wants to end. (millions of us wants him to end his reign of terror over US. we know that saying about wishing in one hand while crapping all over us with the other)

ALL of it here:
12 shot in Chicago on day Obama calls for action to end gun violence

 

[frigidweirdo]

Too many people have too much to lose for this to ever become popular opinion, especially on the right.

Firearm Industry Statistics | Statistic Brain

"Guns and ammunition manufacturing annual revenue $11,000,000,000"

You're looking at an $11 billion industry that would would simply lose their market over night.

"Number of people employed by the firearm manufacturing industry 35,165"

"Number of retail gun dealers 50,812"

85,000 people who'd lose their job or business.

These people aren't going to go down without a fight, they have the NRA behind them, the Republican Party behind them, dealing in a govt that it notorious for not getting things done.

Chances of this happening? Zero.

And none of your diatribe has anything to do with the problem. You're the zero. It's a societal problem, not a manufacturing problem. Liberals can't see, they can only feel their way through life. We should treat nuts like nuts and get them off the streets and quit expecting drugs to solve the it. Violent offenders need to be put away. Children need to be taught accountability and personal responsibility, not victimhood. We need to reject liberalism and it's destructive forces where ever we find it. Passing meaningless legislation pleases only the left, it solves nothing.

You really need to get away from the whole political football game, calm down, and look for the reality of the situation. I can't be bothered to talk to someone who is going to just spout partisan nonsense every time.

 

[Stephanie]

why are you so called sane liberals staying in this party who has went so FAR LEFT into being Fascist/commies/socialist? WHY? please wake up after this disaster you put in as President. admit your mistake and lets get our country BACK

snip:
Don’t Cry For Us, President Obama
In yet another speech on gun control, President Obama shed tears. Manipulate much?
January 6, 2016 By Nicole Russell


On Tuesday, President Obama shed tears during a speech wherein he mentioned previous shootings as motivating his new executive directives on gun violence. His tears are a nauseating display of masterful chicanery, a sign that he’s determined to make his last year his most unforgettable.

Obama, the Benevolent Dictator
During his speech, Obama said, “Our unalienable right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, those rights were stripped from college kids in Blackburg and Santa Barbara and from high schoolers in Columbine and from first graders in Newton…first graders…Every time I think about those kids, it gets me mad.”

After imprinting the image of Sandy Hook in our minds, Obama revealed a set of proposals to tighten loopholes. The Wall Street Journal says they are limited in reach but symbolically powerful. In other words, it’s emotional manipulation either way, as it’s all about making laws to make people feel better about themselves rather than making more effective laws (or repealing laws that have evil unintended consequences).

To conservatives, as David Harsanyi said, “Perhaps no post-World War II president (and maybe none before) has justified his executive overreach by openly contending he was working around the law-making branch of government because it has refused to do what he desired.”

House Speaker Paul Ryan also failed to be impressed. “Rather than focus on criminals and terrorists, he goes after the most law-abiding of citizens. His words and actions amount to a form of intimidation that undermines liberty.”

Tears, Schmears
To ensure that Obama’s gun proposals were well-received, he cried. Liberals were elated and in awe of the humanity of their president. (I don’t recall liberals applauding Obama when the New York Daily News reported he cried tears during Aretha Franklin’s “Natural Woman.”)

all of it here:
Don’t Cry For Us, President Obama

 

[Iceweasel]

You really need to get away from the whole political football game, calm down, and look for the reality of the situation. I can't be bothered to talk to someone who is going to just spout partisan nonsense every time.

I'm calm, you're an idiot to assume much while knowing very little. You can't back up your simple minded talking points that don't address the problems. Blaming me doesn't help your case.

 

[Iceweasel]

On Tuesday, President Obama shed tears during a speech wherein he mentioned previous shootings as motivating his new executive directives on gun violence. His tears are a nauseating display of masterful chicanery, a sign that he’s determined to make his last year his most unforgettable.

Funny, I don't recall the phony asshole shedding tears for any fallen troops or cops. Only when the tears serve the cause.

 

[Weatherman2020]

November 11, 1938 (the day after Kristallnacht) the Regulations Against Jews' Possession of Weapons were promulgated by Minister of the Interior, Wilhelm Frick, effectively depriving all Jews living under the Third Reich of the right to possess any form of weapons including truncheons, knives, or firearms and ammunition.[7]

Before that, some police forces used the pre-existing "trustworthiness" clause to disarm Jews on the basis that "the Jewish population 'cannot be regarded as trustworthy'".
Gun legislation in Germany - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The lack of guns were the LEAST of Germany's Jews problems.

The fact that Anti-semitism was hard-wired into German Culture for 1000 years was.

That's why Hitler started screaming about the Jews, and no one thought he was a crazy person.

"Yawn, guy. Nazis didn't confiscate guns."

You either lied or are ignorant. November 11, 1938 Germany confiscated all weapons from Jews. And for you to claim this was no big deal shows your lies and/or ignorance continues.