The 2nd Amendment for dumbocrats

[legaleagle_45]

Well, the reboot is pretty awesome.

But anyway, the moment you can take your "legal" arguments to the parent of child killed at Newton and tell them why it was constitutionally imperative that Adam Lanza had easy access to a gun, you might have a point.

The moment you can tell me how Connecticut's Assault Weapons Ban prevented Newton we can talk... perhaps if we added another cosmetic feature to the list of attributes which turns a legal semi automatic rifle into an evil "assault weapon of mass destruction"? Maybe that deadly "shoulder thing that goes up"? That will surely do the trick.

I do not mind laws which accomplish positive results. I am offended by knee jerk legislation which accomplishes absolutely nothing... except perhaps makes everyone feel better as if they actually did something. Might as well sit around a campfire and sing "Kumbaya".

Did you know that the the City of Los Angeles seriously considered passing a law imposing a moratorium on murder for 40 hours?

City Council rejects 'ban' on homicides - Los Angeles Times

Don't be too disappointed, Joe. Although the city of LA decided not to pass the moratorium, the county of LA did. Rumor has it that after passing the moratorium, they all lit candles and engaged in a group hug.

Perhaps Cogress can pass a moratorium of crazy people committing mass mayhem? That might work better than trying to pass another AWB, since at least 3 DoJ studies showed that the last one had zero impact on crime or violence. We should do it for the children.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Most Americans support tougher gun laws... Sorry.

The Rare Fringe nuts are the NRA saying we need to let crazy people buy guns because we might all have to fight the government some day.

Asshole when are you going to give some proof?>
Proof
Most Americans want tougher gun laws
NRA saying we need to let crazy people buy guns because we might all have to fight the government some day
LINKS YOU SON OF A GOD DAMN BITCH.

Guy, when you get less unhinged, we can talk.

Again, the best argument for gun control is a five minute conversation with a gun nut.

That's rich, whose unhinged? That just how I talk
You don't have any proof because you are talking out of your ass.

 

[Antares]

Po Joe, caught in another lie.

Can't prove that "most" americans want tougher laws....ya jussa lyin throuh dem teef o yo's.

Most Americans support tougher gun laws... Sorry.

The Rare Fringe nuts are the NRA saying we need to let crazy people buy guns because we might all have to fight the government some day.

Asshole when are you going to give some proof?>
Proof
Most Americans want tougher gun laws
NRA saying we need to let crazy people buy guns because we might all have to fight the government some day
LINKS YOU SON OF A GOD DAMN BITCH.

Guy, when you get less unhinged, we can talk.

Again, the best argument for gun control is a five minute conversation with a gun nut.

 

[legaleagle_45]

Most Americans support tougher gun laws... Sorry.

According to a newly released CBS poll, 50% of Americans think that gun laws should remain the same or be made less strict, while only 47% support tougher gun control laws...

Poll: Support for stricter gun control wanes - CBS News

Sorry Joe.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Again, the best argument for gun control is a five minute conversation with a gun nut.

Or George Washington:

George Washington's address to the second session of the First U.S. Congress:

"Firearms stand next in importance to the Constitution itself. They are the American people's liberty, teeth and keystone under independence. The church, the plow, the prairie wagon and citizens' firearms are indelibly related. From the hour the pilgrims landed to the present day, events, occurrences and tendencies prove that, to ensure peace, security and happiness, the rifle and pistol are equally indispensable. Every corner of this land knows firearms, and more than 99 and 99/100 percent of them by their silence indicate that they are in safe and sane hands. The very atmosphere of firearms anywhere and everywhere restrains evil influence. They deserve a place of honor with all that's good. When firearms go, all goes. We need them every hour."

 

[legaleagle_45]

Again, the best argument for gun control is a five minute conversation with a gun nut.

Or George Washington:

George Washington's address to the second session of the First U.S. Congress:

"Firearms stand next in importance to the Constitution itself. They are the American people's liberty, teeth and keystone under independence. The church, the plow, the prairie wagon and citizens' firearms are indelibly related. From the hour the pilgrims landed to the present day, events, occurrences and tendencies prove that, to ensure peace, security and happiness, the rifle and pistol are equally indispensable. Every corner of this land knows firearms, and more than 99 and 99/100 percent of them by their silence indicate that they are in safe and sane hands. The very atmosphere of firearms anywhere and everywhere restrains evil influence. They deserve a place of honor with all that's good. When firearms go, all goes. We need them every hour."

Bogus quote. Washigton never said that. Your first clue would have been the reference to the "praire wagon" which did not exist in 1790. Your 2nd clue should have been the useage of the terminology "99 and 99/100 percent" which is directly from an Ivory soap commercial and not something anyone would use in the late 1700's.. Here is a link to a pro gun website which explains this bogus quote in greater detail:

http://guncite.com/gc2ndbog.html

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Again, the best argument for gun control is a five minute conversation with a gun nut.

Or George Washington:

George Washington's address to the second session of the First U.S. Congress:

"Firearms stand next in importance to the Constitution itself. They are the American people's liberty, teeth and keystone under independence. The church, the plow, the prairie wagon and citizens' firearms are indelibly related. From the hour the pilgrims landed to the present day, events, occurrences and tendencies prove that, to ensure peace, security and happiness, the rifle and pistol are equally indispensable. Every corner of this land knows firearms, and more than 99 and 99/100 percent of them by their silence indicate that they are in safe and sane hands. The very atmosphere of firearms anywhere and everywhere restrains evil influence. They deserve a place of honor with all that's good. When firearms go, all goes. We need them every hour."

Bogus quote. Washigton never said that. Your first clue would have been the reference to the "praire wagon" which did not exist in 1790. Your 2nd clue should have been the useage of the terminology "99 and 99/100 percent" which is directly from an Ivory soap commercial and not something anyone would use in the late 1700's.. Here is a link to a pro gun website which explains this bogus quote in greater detail:

http://guncite.com/gc2ndbog.html

ok then try this one:

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government"

-- Thomas Jefferson, 1 Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

 

[P@triot]

Senate Support for Gun Rights Shown in Budget Vote

Mike Lee gets a "2/3rds vote" amendment through on gun control with democrats joining

A little-noticed Senate vote just before 4 in the morning on March 23 - amid the chamber's 13-hour vote-a-rama on a fiscal 2014 budget resolution - suggests trouble for President Barack Obama's gun control agenda.

Senators voted 50-49 in favor of an amendment by Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, to establish a two-thirds requirement for the passage of any gun control legislation in their chamber.

Senate Support for Gun Rights Shown in Budget Vote : Roll Call Policy

 

[JoeB131]

Po Joe, caught in another lie.

Can't prove that "most" americans want tougher laws....ya jussa lyin throuh dem teef o yo's.

[

Guy, when you get less unhinged, we can talk.

Again, the best argument for gun control is a five minute conversation with a gun nut.

Poll: Majority of Americans back stricter gun laws - CBS News

Asked if they generally back stricter gun laws, more than half of respondents - 54 percent - support stricter gun laws; 53 percent say it would deter gun violence. That is a jump from April - before the Newtown and Aurora shootings - when only 39 percent backed stricter gun laws but about the same as ten years ago.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

Second Amendment to the United States Constitution - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

and all that means what? oh yea nothing. more lib spin. Fact is James Madison wrote the 2nd amendment, in fact he wrote all but 1 of them. and why did he write the second? to protect us against tyranists and would be tyranists like yourself. another fact is, just like the tyranists were crushed in 1776, you modern day rights suckers will be crushed too

"Americans need never fear their government because of the advantage of being armed. . ."

Yeah, with a single-shot musket. BTW, do you consider Justice Antonin Scalia a "tyrant" because he supports restrictions on the 2nd Amendment?

This is the dumbest argument I've heard.

Using this logic you wouldn't have first amendment protections in emails, phones, internet, texting, skyping or any other modern communication device.

 

[jon_berzerk]

and all that means what? oh yea nothing. more lib spin. Fact is James Madison wrote the 2nd amendment, in fact he wrote all but 1 of them. and why did he write the second? to protect us against tyranists and would be tyranists like yourself. another fact is, just like the tyranists were crushed in 1776, you modern day rights suckers will be crushed too

"Americans need never fear their government because of the advantage of being armed. . ."

Yeah, with a single-shot musket. BTW, do you consider Justice Antonin Scalia a "tyrant" because he supports restrictions on the 2nd Amendment?

This is the dumbest argument I've heard.

Using this logic you wouldn't have first amendment protections in emails, phones, internet, texting, skyping or any other modern communication device.

i traveled to Texas last Sept

one could feel the freedom in the air as you crossed the state line

 

[legaleagle_45]

ok then try this one:

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government"

-- Thomas Jefferson, 1 Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

The first sentence is a good quote. It comes from Jefferson's draft Virginia Constitution, 1776. The second sentence is bogus. An explanation is provided on the same website which debunked the Washington Liberty Teeth quote.. Let me direct you to a web page on the same site which provides actual quotes of the founders.... there are plenty of good ones out there so we do not need to make any up

GunCite: Second Amendment-Quotes from the Framers and their contemporaries

 

[Antares]

Po Joe....run along now, the big people are talking.

Currently, support for stricter gun control laws stands at 47 percent today, down from a high of 57 percent just after the shootings. Thirty-nine percent want those laws kept as they are, and another 11 percent want them made less strict.

/ March 26, 2013, 7:00 AM

Poll: Support for stricter gun control wanes - CBS News

Po Joe, caught in another lie.

Can't prove that "most" americans want tougher laws....ya jussa lyin throuh dem teef o yo's.

[

Guy, when you get less unhinged, we can talk.

Again, the best argument for gun control is a five minute conversation with a gun nut.

Poll: Majority of Americans back stricter gun laws - CBS News

Asked if they generally back stricter gun laws, more than half of respondents - 54 percent - support stricter gun laws; 53 percent say it would deter gun violence. That is a jump from April - before the Newtown and Aurora shootings - when only 39 percent backed stricter gun laws but about the same as ten years ago.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

ok then try this one:

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government"

-- Thomas Jefferson, 1 Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

The first sentence is a good quote. It comes from Jefferson's draft Virginia Constitution, 1776. The second sentence is bogus. An explanation is provided on the same website which debunked the Washington Liberty Teeth quote.. Let me direct you to a web page on the same site which provides actual quotes of the founders.... there are plenty of good ones out there so we do not need to make any up

GunCite: Second Amendment-Quotes from the Framers and their contemporaries

OK what about this one:
Alexander Hamilton: "...that standing army can never be formidable (threatening) to the liberties
of the people, while there is a large body of citizens, little if at all inferior to them in the use of arms."
(Federalist Paper #29)

 

[legaleagle_45]

ok then try this one:

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government"

-- Thomas Jefferson, 1 Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

The first sentence is a good quote. It comes from Jefferson's draft Virginia Constitution, 1776. The second sentence is bogus. An explanation is provided on the same website which debunked the Washington Liberty Teeth quote.. Let me direct you to a web page on the same site which provides actual quotes of the founders.... there are plenty of good ones out there so we do not need to make any up

GunCite: Second Amendment-Quotes from the Framers and their contemporaries

OK what about this one:
Alexander Hamilton: "...that standing army can never be formidable (threatening) to the liberties
of the people, while there is a large body of citizens, little if at all inferior to them in the use of arms."
(Federalist Paper #29)

Close, but not quite.. Here is the actual quote.

This will not only lessen the call for military establishments, but if circumstances should at any time oblige the government to form an army of any magnitude that army can never be formidable to the liberties of the people while there is a large body of citizens, little, if at all, inferior to them in discipline and the use of arms, who stand ready to defend their own rights and those of their fellow-citizens. This appears to me the only substitute that can be devised for a standing army, and the best possible security against it, if it should exist.

The Avalon Project : Federalist No 29

Federalist 29 contains a lot of good stuff, I use it often to explain that "well regulated" means properly trained.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

The first sentence is a good quote. It comes from Jefferson's draft Virginia Constitution, 1776. The second sentence is bogus. An explanation is provided on the same website which debunked the Washington Liberty Teeth quote.. Let me direct you to a web page on the same site which provides actual quotes of the founders.... there are plenty of good ones out there so we do not need to make any up

GunCite: Second Amendment-Quotes from the Framers and their contemporaries

OK what about this one:
Alexander Hamilton: "...that standing army can never be formidable (threatening) to the liberties
of the people, while there is a large body of citizens, little if at all inferior to them in the use of arms."
(Federalist Paper #29)

Close, but not quite.. Here is the actual quote.

This will not only lessen the call for military establishments, but if circumstances should at any time oblige the government to form an army of any magnitude that army can never be formidable to the liberties of the people while there is a large body of citizens, little, if at all, inferior to them in discipline and the use of arms, who stand ready to defend their own rights and those of their fellow-citizens. This appears to me the only substitute that can be devised for a standing army, and the best possible security against it, if it should exist.

The Avalon Project : Federalist No 29

Federalist 29 contains a lot of good stuff, I use it often to explain that "well regulated" means properly trained.

ok what about this:

"Little more can be aimed at with respect to the people at large than to have them properly armed
and equipped." (Id) {responding to the claim that the militia itself could threaten liberty}" There is
something so far-fetched, and so extravagant in the idea of danger of liberty from the militia that one
is at a loss whether to treat it with gravity or raillery (mockery). (Id)

 

[legaleagle_45]

ok what about this:

"Little more can be aimed at with respect to the people at large than to have them properly armed
and equipped." (Id) {responding to the claim that the militia itself could threaten liberty}" There is
something so far-fetched, and so extravagant in the idea of danger of liberty from the militia that one
is at a loss whether to treat it with gravity or raillery (mockery). (Id)

An accurate quote, but (perhaps) an inaccurate interpretation. Hamilton did not believe that a militia could be formed from the whole body of the militia that would form an effective defense because the amount of training necessary to achieve that goal would distract them from other activities. Instead, he favored what is termed a "select militia" composed of persons who a spend more time training than could be reasonably expected of the people at large. As for the people themselves? Insure that they are properly armed and give them a bit of training but nothi8ng more rigorous. The full paragraph from which your quote is drawn:

The project of disciplining all the militia of the United States is as futile as it would be injurious, if it were capable of being carried into execution. A tolerable expertness in military movements is a business that requires time and practice. It is not a day, or even a week, that will suffice for the attainment of it. To oblige the great body of the yeomanry, and of the other classes of the citizens, to be under arms for the purpose of going through military exercises and evolutions, as often as might be necessary to acquire the degree of perfection which would entitle them to the character of a well-regulated militia, would be a real grievance to the people, and a serious public inconvenience and loss. It would form an annual deduction from the productive labor of the country, to an amount which, calculating upon the present numbers of the people, would not fall far short of the whole expense of the civil establishments of all the States. To attempt a thing which would abridge the mass of labor and industry to so considerable an extent, would be unwise: and the experiment, if made, could not succeed, because it would not long be endured. Little more can reasonably be aimed at, with respect to the people at large, than to have them properly armed and equipped; and in order to see that this be not neglected, it will be necessary to assemble them once or twice in the course of a year.

The next paragraph then discloses tidea of Hamilton of a "select corps"

But though the scheme of disciplining the whole nation must be abandoned as mischievous or impracticable; yet it is a matter of the utmost importance that a well-digested plan should, as soon as possible, be adopted for the proper establishment of the militia. The attention of the government ought particularly to be directed to the formation of a select corps of moderate extent, upon such principles as will really fit them for service in case of need. By thus circumscribing the plan, it will be possible to have an excellent body of well-trained militia, ready to take the field whenever the defense of the State shall require it. This will not only lessen the call for military establishments, but if circumstances should at any time oblige the government to form an army of any magnitude that army can never be formidable to the liberties of the people while there is a large body of citizens, little, if at all, inferior to them in discipline and the use of arms, who stand ready to defend their own rights and those of their fellow-citizens. This appears to me the only substitute that can be devised for a standing army, and the best possible security against it, if it should exist.

Many of the framers feared a select miltia as much as they feared a standing army. Hamiltons views were probably in the minority... IMHO

Hope that helps.

 

[P@triot]

How sad is it that a 15 year old understands the problem, the solutions, the Constitution, the facts, and the issue exponentially more thoroughly than every liberal in America? I love how she mentioned the rash of horrific stabbings that have occurred all across China, including the one incident in which 22 children were STABBED to death.

As I've stated a 1,000x's already, liberals don't give a fuck about human life. This is evidence by the fact that more people die in automobile accidents and they have never indicated the slightest outrage over automobiles and the fact that they murder over 1 million babies every year and celebrate abortion as a "freedom" to murder.

Video of 15-Year-Old Girl Lecturing Maryland Lawmakers on Gun Control Goes Viral | Video | TheBlaze.com

 

[kaz]

In other words, the Constitution contains no provisions ceding to the federal government a person’s right to keep and bear arms; thus the federal government has no authority to infringe in this area

So you don't think the framers meant that government can decide who gets this particular right and license the ones they think should get it charging them application and ongoing fees to maintain it?



Hmm...maybe you're right...

 

[DiamondDave]

then why does the whole scotus disagree with you?

A lust for power that only rivals your lust for meth