Retired SCOTUS Justice John Paul Stevens says........"It's simple, repeal the 2d Amendment"

[garhkal]

Originally Posted by I B Hankering

Can you show where the government helps pay for ammo the way the government subsidizes abortions, green weenie? Show us the clause or legislation that makes hysterical anti-gunners pay for another private citizen's gun or ammo, green weenie.

And since when did abortions become an actual CONSTITUTIONAL right??

[dilbert firestorm]

Originally Posted by themystic

Whos the SC loony who was the deciding vote on Obama Care and Gay Marriage. They should get rid of that liberal fucker!

Justice Roberts on ObamaCare; Justice Kennedy on Gay marriage.

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by WTF

The Vast Industrial Military Complex is the .....

... reason your parents weren't science experiments in a concentration camp.

(Although not conceiving you might have been a good thing!)

Go whine somewhere else.

[SpeedRacerXXX]

Originally Posted by garhkal

We on the right have been saying for YEARS< that the left's end goal is total confiscation of all guns and the repealing of the 2nd amendment, but were called NUTS and conspiracy whacos for saying it..

A handful of people want ALL guns done away with. A handful of people want NO gun control, meaning anyone, regardless of age or mental problems, can own any weapon at any time and take it wherever they want to go.

The overwhelming majority of people in this country, whether they consider themselves to be right of center or left of center, support the rights of individuals to own guns but also support a level of gun control.

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX

A handful of people want ALL guns done away with. A handful of people want NO gun control, meaning anyone, regardless of age or mental problems, can own any weapon at any time and take it wherever they want to go.

The overwhelming majority of people in this country, whether they consider themselves to be right of center or left of center, support the rights of individuals to own guns but also support a level of gun control.

And with all due respect ... what does the above contribute to the discussion of the justification for "a level of gun control"?

It appears to be a generally accepted statistic that there are more firearm "assaults" in this country with handguns than with the misnomered "assault weapons." So like so many efforts on the part of Liberals to use government to restrict citizens' activities they use inaccurate labeling to "propogandize" their effort, just like Conservatives to in their narratives to "sell" their agenda.

An old legitimate saying is: "Bad facts make bad laws."

The current events in the "new wave" of firearm hysteria fits.

Stopping the retail purchase of ANYTHING doesn't stop possession! It just increases the price or creates an environment for smuggling, robberies, and burglaries. So, if one doesn't stop possession they don't stop the potential of the crime.

Can you say "Prohibition"?

[grean]

Originally Posted by LexusLover

An old legitimate saying is: "Bad facts make bad laws."

LL,

Don't ever think we don't see eye to eye on a few things.

[grean]

Originally Posted by I B Hankering

Can you show where the government helps pay for ammo the way the government subsidizes abortions, green weenie? Show us the clause or legislation that makes hysterical anti-gunners pay for another private citizen's gun or ammo, green weenie.

I'm not sure I understand what point you're trying to make.

[rexdutchman]

Wow this crashed and burned fast

[grean]

Originally Posted by LexusLover

And with all due respect ... what does the above contribute to the discussion of the justification for "a level of gun control"?

It appears to be a generally accepted statistic that there are more firearm "assaults" in this country with handguns than with the misnomered "assault weapons." So like so many efforts on the part of Liberals to use government to restrict citizens' activities they use inaccurate labeling to "propogandize" their effort, just like Conservatives to in their narratives to "sell" their agenda.

An old legitimate saying is: "Bad facts make bad laws."

The current events in the "new wave" of firearm hysteria fits.

Stopping the retail purchase of ANYTHING doesn't stop possession! It just increases the price or creates an environment for smuggling, robberies, and burglaries. So, if one doesn't stop possession they don't stop the potential of the crime.

Can you say "Prohibition"?

I think there are more people killed with bare hands than with AR-15s and all other rifles combined annually, just to add to your point. Oh and don't forget knives...


And here's a real interesting point


Europe had more mass shooting deaths than the U.S. and firearms are far more heavily regulated in Europe

https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/sorry-despite-gun-control-advocates-claims-u-s-isnt-the-worst-country-for-mass-shootings/


https://crimeresearch.org/2015/06/comparing-death-rates-from-mass-public-shootings-in-the-us-and-europe/


Heres the real question for you common sense gun law folks.

Are you okay with someone being killed with a shotgun?

No, right?

Then why is it common sense to just ban AR-15s ?

Obviously the conclusion you will come to is that all guns mus be banned.

The only issue is that what you've only achieved is disarming law abiding citizens.

Bad guys still have them. Bad guys will still kill.

Good guys won't have guns to stop them.

[rexdutchman]

^^^ That's on point ( the bill of rights as a whole should not be infringed )

[grean]

Originally Posted by rexdutchman

^^^ That's on point ( the bill of rights as a whole should not be infringed )

The whole point in enumerating those was so to make them uncontroversial. We as humans have those rights to begin with. The enumeration of those in the Constitution was to further limit the government's ability to infringe on them.

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by grean

I'm not sure I understand what point you're trying to make.

You're pretending to be unaware that American taxpayers are subsidizing abortions through PPH? Your ilk is all in to financially support some ignorant cunt's abortion because she can't keep her ankles crossed or be troubled to use protection and you want to use my tax dollars to pay for her mistakes!?! Where's the public set aside for the NRA? Better yet, cut public funding for PPH. Fuck lib-retard duplicity.

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by grean

I'm not sure I understand what point you're trying to make.

What I got is the 2nd amendment is about the government not infringing on the NATURAL RIGHT for individuals to bear arms for their protection from other citizens who masquerade under the spurious authority of "the government" ... and those other citizens don't help me pay for my ammunition to exercise that right. Whereas, at least in our anglo-saxon based jurisprudence and mores citizens DON'T HAVE any NATURAL RIGHT to kill their offspring, and many citizens who engage in that UNNATURAL ACT expect the other citizens who oppose it to pay for it.

I won't engage in an "conversation" about it being cheaper to destroy the embryo than to raise it until it decides to be self-sufficient IF EVER. The destruction of viable human life in our society should not be based on "economic" evaluations or "budget constraints" ... and others should not be taxed to support UNNATURAL behavior.

[Jackie S]

Originally Posted by rexdutchman

^^^ That's on point ( the bill of rights as a whole should not be infringed )

I agree. In a Secular Society such as ours, our Bill of Rights is the closest thing we have to a sacred document.

As I watch the extreme Left's tearing down of our institutions, I can see the hand pulling on the handle, the water is swirling, and the turd that was the greatest Country on the Planet is headed for the septic tank of failed Republics.

[grean]

Originally Posted by I B Hankering

You're pretending to be unaware that American taxpayers are subsidizing abortions through PPH? Your ilk is all in to financially support some ignorant cunt's abortion because she can't keep her ankles crossed or be troubled to use protection and you want to use my tax dollars to pay for her mistakes!?! Where's the public set aside for the NRA? Better yet, cut public funding for PPH. Fuck lib-retard duplicity.

No, I'm well aware of that. When I said I don't understand, I meant I don't understand the point it makes to 4A protecting privacy and inherently giving a woman complete sovereignty over her body.

My only issue with PPH being defunded is that I think in the long run abortion is cheaper for the tax than the welfare.

Dead people have more sovereignty over their bodies because of 4A than living women....

Just saying.