Why do Extremists on the 2nd Amendment Feel the Need to Lie and Deceive?

[Procrustes Stretched]

Why do Extremists on the 2nd Amendment Feel the Need to Lie and Deceive?

I guess it's what most all extremists do, but come on...

Hey hey, lets face it. If it isn't your kid, spouse, relative or friend that gets killed accidently or on purpose by some crazy with a gun, then there is not a gun problem in this country.

If someone in my family was murdered by a criminal with a gun I wouldn't blame the gun.

A clear indication that you do not lack a functiong brain.

no one blames the gun.

people may blame easy access to guns and more, but wtf blames the gun?

Who blames the gun?

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Why do Extremists on the 2nd Amendment Feel the Need to Lie and Deceive?

I guess it's what most all extremists do, but come on...

A clear indication that you do not lack a functiong brain.

no one blames the gun.

people may blame easy access to guns and more, but wtf blames the gun?

Who blames the gun?

Every one that is trying to ban weapons because of how they LOOK.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Why do Extremists on the 2nd Amendment Feel the Need to Lie and Deceive?

I guess it's what most all extremists do, but come on...

no one blames the gun.

people may blame easy access to guns and more, but wtf blames the gun?

Who blames the gun?

Every one that is trying to ban weapons because of how they LOOK.

Some people want to ban what they call 'assault' weapons...also, what they view as automatic weapons (already banned?) and semi-automatic weapons.

As long as weapons can be altered and modified with ease...and all of this is hugely popular in 'trade' magazines(newspaper types) and shows, people will be confused and mistaken on what is what.

But the reasons people are saying how a gun looks? That is framing by the NRA and it's supporters. Not many people speak that way "I want to ban weapons that look a certain way."

so...are you a liar, a deceiver, or both, or just as ignorant and ill informed as your opposition?

 

[9thIDdoc]

"But the reasons people are saying how a gun looks? That is framing by the NRA and it's supporters. Not many people speak that way "I want to ban weapons that look a certain way."

so...are you a liar, a deceiver, or both, or just as ignorant and ill informed as your opposition?"
__________________

There is ignorance aplenty and most of it resides in the camp of the gun control freaks like yourself who simply too ignorant on the subject to hold an intelligent conversation about it. Wanting to ban something because it looks "evil' or "miltary" is indeed pretty stupid but that is exactly what the "military features" or "assault weapon" non-issue boils down to. And-guess what-it's not the NRA or it's supporters who invented it.

 

[TruthSeeker56]

Why do Extremists on the 2nd Amendment Feel the Need to Lie and Deceive?

I guess it's what most all extremists do, but come on...

A clear indication that you do not lack a functiong brain.

no one blames the gun.

people may blame easy access to guns and more, but wtf blames the gun?

Who blames the gun?

Don't play the "bait and switch" with us, Dante. Save it for your Obamanista friends.

Assigning blame. Pointing fingers. Restricting freedom. Diluting Constitutional rights.

This is the END GAME of the leftists.

Blame the gun. Blame the gun manufacturers. Blame the ammo manufacturers.

Remember, Dante, at least 47% of the people who voted last November have FUNCTIONING BRAINS, and I bet that most of those 47% also own firearms.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Why do Extremists on the 2nd Amendment Feel the Need to Lie and Deceive?

No idea, particularly when one considers the fact they have the legal advantage.

They should welcome a new AWB, allowing a legal challenge to finally settle the matter.

Otherwise it’s just more conservative partisan nonsense.

 

[tjvh]

Why do Extremists on the 2nd Amendment Feel the Need to Lie and Deceive?

No idea, particularly when one considers the fact they have the legal advantage.

They should welcome a new AWB, allowing a legal challenge to finally settle the matter.

Otherwise it’s just more conservative partisan nonsense.

Welcome a new AWB??? Why do you think this country needs more bans numbskull? Accept the fact that too large of a percentage of Americans will never agree to follow Progressive idiots down the path to their utopian dream, get over it already... You leftists are NUTS.

 

[MisterBeale]

I guess what some people have a hard time facing is that the language of the second amendment is itself pretty extreme. The founders believed in natural rights. They didn't believe that governments were the vehicle that granted or revoked rights, they didn't view rights as privileges. So let's just review, shall we?

"A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

It really is self explanatory. This right shall not be infringed. Why? So that the people's rights can be defended from all those who might seek to oppress their rights, foreign and domestic. The founders were just as concerned about a tyrannical national government, as they were of foreign invaders. This is why they included language reserving all other powers not expressly given to the federal government, to the states. Since this time, the federal government has used the commerce clause, subsequent amendments, and executive privilege to meddle in the sovereign rights of the states and the people. Thankfully, the Second Amendment has been provided as that line in the sand, that line from which tyranny shall not cross. And we have had our history lesson, that lesson was the colonization and the first revolutionary war.

The original tea party was about Liberty, it was about having equal force to that of ones oppressors to defend ones liberties. It was precisely what Franklin was talking about.

"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
~ Benjamin Franklin

Remember Rab Silsbee and his trouble matching firepower to his oppressors in Johnny Tremaine? We must never forget the lessons of our history. My son has read this great work, he understands how real politics work. Have your sons, have your daughters? Have you?

"A man can stand up to anything with a good weapon in his hands. Without it, he's but a dumb beast."
~Rab

[ame="https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=IkIKDKtRQuY#!"]https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=IkIKDKtRQuY#![/ame]

After the Second Amendment is gone, the First shall be the last to fall.

Facebook Purges Pro-Gun Accounts

 

[novasteve]

Why do libs lie and say the so called "assault weapons" are the same weapons that the military uses? Why do libs say they are automatic weapons? Why do they say "large caliber" when referring to a 223?

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

I guess what some people have a hard time facing is that the language of the second amendment is itself pretty extreme. The founders believed in natural rights. They didn't believe that governments were the vehicle that granted or revoked rights, they didn't view rights as privileges. So let's just review, shall we?

"A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

It really is self explanatory. This right shall not be infringed. Why? So that the people's rights can be defended from all those who might seek to oppress their rights, foreign and domestic. The founders were just as concerned about a tyrannical national government, as they were of foreign invaders. This is why they included language reserving all other powers not expressly given to the federal government, to the states. Since this time, the federal government has used the commerce clause, subsequent amendments, and executive privilege to meddle in the sovereign rights of the states and the people. Thankfully, the Second Amendment has been provided as that line in the sand, that line from which tyranny shall not cross. And we have had our history lesson, that lesson was the colonization and the first revolutionary war.

The original tea party was about Liberty, it was about having equal force to that of ones oppressors to defend ones liberties. It was precisely what Franklin was talking about.

"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
~ Benjamin Franklin

Remember Rab Silsbee and his trouble matching firepower to his oppressors in Johnny Tremaine? We must never forget the lessons of our history. My son has read this great work, he understands how real politics work. Have your sons, have your daughters? Have you?

"A man can stand up to anything with a good weapon in his hands. Without it, he's but a dumb beast."
~Rab

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=IkIKDKtRQuY#!

After the Second Amendment is gone, the First shall be the last to fall.

Facebook Purges Pro-Gun Accounts

Actually not.

For decades the Second Amendment was perceived as a collective right. Indeed, the very question that Heller addressed was whether the Second Amendment enshrined a collective or individual right, where the Court ruled the latter.

 

[jwoodie]

Why do Extremists on the 2nd Amendment Feel the Need to Lie and Deceive?

I guess it's what most all extremists do, but come on...

A clear indication that you do not lack a functiong brain.

no one blames the gun.

people may blame easy access to guns and more, but wtf blames the gun?

Who blames the gun?

Questions involving a false premise often begin with "why."

 

[MisterBeale]

Actually not.

For decades the Second Amendment was perceived as a collective right. Indeed, the very question that Heller addressed was whether the Second Amendment enshrined a collective or individual right, where the Court ruled the latter.

Actually so. It matters not how the court interprets the constitution, it matters what the constitution actually says. The elites can twist the words all out of their intended meaning all they wish. They like to parse each word, and mince the context to meet their desired goals, but the culture and American character of this great nation will not be denigrated. The men and women of this fine nation, they are not fools. What do you take them for?

Just recently with the ruling on the Affordable Care Act, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court read into the Constitution that Fascism, something our Grandfathers fought to defeat, is now the law of the land?? The populace must purchase goods and services from the private sector if Uncle Same tells them to? What next, the post office? Yup, in my neighbor hood it's contracted out. And now are they going to force my kids to privatized schools?
‘Disciplinary fees’ show the trouble with charter schools and privatization

Reading Fascism into the document was a terrible mistake, and frankly, the Conservatives were idiots to sell it out and join with Liberals just for business interests.

Just because they interpret something into the document, doesn't mean it is there. The people need to be aware of how the system works, and how these men are put into power.

How can men bare arms for a "collective" right if they do not own arms individually? What an asinine and absurd proposition. The only people that "perceived" it as a collective right were the political elites, ones that didn't construct or put the document into effect. Really? Go home.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Why do Extremists on the 2nd Amendment Feel the Need to Lie and Deceive?

I guess it's what most all extremists do, but come on...

no one blames the gun.

people may blame easy access to guns and more, but wtf blames the gun?

Who blames the gun?

Questions involving a false premise often begin with "why."

why?

Quotes: Originally Posted by jwoodie:

"Why does abortion need to be..."

"Why is it that Liberals..."

"Why the Polls may..."


and on'

and on


and on...

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

It matters not how the court interprets the constitution, it matters what the constitution actually says.

Ignorance on display

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Why do Extremists on the 2nd Amendment Feel the Need to Lie and Deceive?

I guess it's what most all extremists do, but come on...



Who blames the gun?

Every one that is trying to ban weapons because of how they LOOK.

Some people want to ban what they call 'assault' weapons...also, what they view as automatic weapons (already banned?) and semi-automatic weapons.

As long as weapons can be altered and modified with ease...and all of this is hugely popular in 'trade' magazines(newspaper types) and shows, people will be confused and mistaken on what is what.

But the reasons people are saying how a gun looks? That is framing by the NRA and it's supporters. Not many people speak that way "I want to ban weapons that look a certain way."

so...are you a liar, a deceiver, or both, or just as ignorant and ill informed as your opposition?

That explains why Feinstein wants to ban guns that detachable magazines and barrel shrouds.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

"But the reasons people are saying how a gun looks? That is framing by the NRA and it's supporters. Not many people speak that way "I want to ban weapons that look a certain way."

so...are you a liar, a deceiver, or both, or just as ignorant and ill informed as your opposition?"
__________________

There is ignorance aplenty and most of it resides in the camp of the gun control freaks like yourself who simply too ignorant on the subject to hold an intelligent conversation about it. Wanting to ban something because it looks "evil' or "miltary" is indeed pretty stupid but that is exactly what the "military features" or "assault weapon" non-issue boils down to. And-guess what-it's not the NRA or it's supporters who invented it.

Dante and honesty have never met.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I guess what some people have a hard time facing is that the language of the second amendment is itself pretty extreme. The founders believed in natural rights. They didn't believe that governments were the vehicle that granted or revoked rights, they didn't view rights as privileges. So let's just review, shall we?

"A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

It really is self explanatory. This right shall not be infringed. Why? So that the people's rights can be defended from all those who might seek to oppress their rights, foreign and domestic. The founders were just as concerned about a tyrannical national government, as they were of foreign invaders. This is why they included language reserving all other powers not expressly given to the federal government, to the states. Since this time, the federal government has used the commerce clause, subsequent amendments, and executive privilege to meddle in the sovereign rights of the states and the people. Thankfully, the Second Amendment has been provided as that line in the sand, that line from which tyranny shall not cross. And we have had our history lesson, that lesson was the colonization and the first revolutionary war.

The original tea party was about Liberty, it was about having equal force to that of ones oppressors to defend ones liberties. It was precisely what Franklin was talking about.

"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
~ Benjamin Franklin

Remember Rab Silsbee and his trouble matching firepower to his oppressors in Johnny Tremaine? We must never forget the lessons of our history. My son has read this great work, he understands how real politics work. Have your sons, have your daughters? Have you?

"A man can stand up to anything with a good weapon in his hands. Without it, he's but a dumb beast."
~Rab

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=IkIKDKtRQuY#!

After the Second Amendment is gone, the First shall be the last to fall.

Facebook Purges Pro-Gun Accounts

Actually not.

For decades the Second Amendment was perceived as a collective right. Indeed, the very question that Heller addressed was whether the Second Amendment enshrined a collective or individual right, where the Court ruled the latter.

They said the same thing about freedom for decades, they were just as wrong about that as they were about guns.

 

[yidnar]

turn in your assault weapon and maybe this guy will turn his in ..........