POLL: 65% See Gun Rights As Protection Against Tyranny

[WTF]

Originally Posted by Chica Chaser

There was no such thing as telephones, television or radio, let alone the internet in 1791. Does that make the first amendment antiquated and out of date as well then? I'm sure the Founders certainly couldn't have imagined todays modern communications when their US mail service consisted of a courier riding a horse to deliver a message.

We regulate all those things...yet some shit their pants at gun control.

Look, I'm not for any regulations but all ya;ll are really arguing about is the degree of regulation.

I think it all a waste of time, hell in Mexico it is illegal to have guns and the State Department is always issuing warnings about how dangerous it is down there!
I just find these gun rights crowd argument disingenuous is all. They never stuck up for gays or a woman's right to choose...I could go on and on. Kinda like these fools arguing they want State government to tell them what to do and not the Feds! How fucking stupid of logic is that?

[i'va biggen]

Was surprised no one was bitching about Danny Glover's speech the other day.Deep in the heart of Texas.

[gnadfly]

Originally Posted by Chica Chaser

There was no such thing as telephones, television or radio, let alone the internet in 1791. Does that make the first amendment antiquated and out of date as well then? I'm sure the Founders certainly couldn't have imagined todays modern communications when their US mail service consisted of a courier riding a horse to deliver a message.

Little known fact: When the Barbary Pirates got out of hand, President Jefferson sent a military force instead of blaming the printing press.

We've learned to ignore Danny Glover and execute murderers anyway. Kansas would be well served to follow Texas' lead.

[BigLouie]

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

"The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops that can be, on any pretence, raised in the United States."

-- Noah Webster

Kinda looks like Noah Webster thought the right to bear arms was so the people could protect themselves from government. But what the hell does he know?

When Noah said that, back when you were in what the second grade, it might have been true because the US had no large standing army. This is no longer the case. The fire power the Army, Navy and Air Force have at their disposal so dwarfs what people have at their disposal that it would hardly seem a fair fight. Give me one example in US history of any group standing up to the US armed forces and winning in the long run. Let's see Civil War, nope. All of you fanatics have seen Red Dawn one too many times.

[Sidewinder]

Originally Posted by BigLouie

When Noah said that, back when you were in what the second grade, it might have been true because the US had no large standing army. This is no longer the case. The fire power the Army, Navy and Air Force have at their disposal so dwarfs what people have at their disposal that it would hardly seem a fair fight. Give me one example in US history of any group standing up to the US armed forces and winning in the long run. Let's see Civil War, nope. All of you fanatics have seen Red Dawn one too many times.

Why LOUIE! A dyed-in-the-wool Liberal like yourself, admitting that the US *WON* the Vietnam War???

They'll take away your key to the Liberal bathroom!

[Poet Laureate]

Originally Posted by Jackie S

This goes back to the fact that when a Government Official takes an oath of office, he swears to defend and uphold the Constitutuion of The United States.
No where does it say "only the parts you agree with".

The 2d Amendment is The Law of The Land. The Supreme Court has upheld it numerous times as being exactly what it says, "The Rights of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed".

Nice speech. Where'd you copy it from? Because the Supreme Court has allowed the right of the people to keep and bear arms to be infringed, numerous times. Or did I miss the part where I can go buy a tank, a bazooka, a rocket launcher, or a box of hand grenades? Did I miss the part where I can mount a twin fifty over the basketball hoop on my garage? Wouldn't I love to have a mortar in my backyard that I can use when a neighbor three blocks away is still partying at 3 a.m. and I need to get up at 6 to go to work?
-
The reality is that the right of the people to keep and bear arms has been infringed almost from the start, or did some of your great-great-grandparents have Gatling guns in their barns?

[joe bloe]

Originally Posted by Poet Laureate

Nice speech. Where'd you copy it from? Because the Supreme Court has allowed the right of the people to keep and bear arms to be infringed, numerous times. Or did I miss the part where I can go buy a tank, a bazooka, a rocket launcher, or a box of hand grenades? Did I miss the part where I can mount a twin fifty over the basketball hoop on my garage? Wouldn't I love to have a mortar in my backyard that I can use when a neighbor three blocks away is still partying at 3 a.m. and I need to get up at 6 to go to work?
-
The reality is that the right of the people to keep and bear arms has been infringed almost from the start, or did some of your great-great-grandparents have Gatling guns in their barns?

Supreme court rulings don't change the meaning of the Constitution. If SCOTUS allows infringement of the right to bear arms, that doesn't change the meaning of the second amendment; shall not be infringed still means shall not be infringed. SCOTUS isn't God clarifying the meaning of the Bible. A five to four ruling today can be overturned by another five to four ruling tomorrow.

[BigLouie]

Originally Posted by Sidewinder

Why LOUIE! A dyed-in-the-wool Liberal like yourself, admitting that the US *WON* the Vietnam War???

Last I looked that war was fought in Vietnam and NOT within the continental US.

[i'va biggen]

Originally Posted by Sidewinder

Why LOUIE! A dyed-in-the-wool Liberal like yourself, admitting that the US *WON* the Vietnam War???

They'll take away your key to the Liberal bathroom!

He passed over the Seminoles also,but I knew his meaning.Yall with your AK's won't look good when they run the tanks in.

[Sidewinder]

Originally Posted by BigLouie

Last I looked that war was fought in Vietnam and NOT within the continental US.

Cue that wonderful song from "Best Little Whorehouse in Texas"...

"Ooh I love to dance a little sidestep..."

You didn't say "in the continental US", Louie.

And, of course, there's always General Custer at Little Bighorn...

[Sidewinder]

Originally Posted by Poet Laureate

Because the Supreme Court has allowed the right of the people to keep and bear arms to be infringed, numerous times.

Poet, would you care to cite the cases?

Prior to DC v. Heller, the Supreme Court touched the Second Amendment precisely three times.

Or perhaps you'd cite the cases where the right was infringed, the case was appealed to the Supreme Court, and the Court declined to review.

I invite you to observe that I'm not holding my breath...

[joe bloe]

Originally Posted by gnadfly

Little known fact: When the Barbary Pirates got out of hand, President Jefferson sent a military force instead of blaming the printing press.

We've learned to ignore Danny Glover and execute murderers anyway. Kansas would be well served to follow Texas' lead.

The Navy and Marine Corps were created by Congress specifically to fight the Barbary Pirates.

The Barbary Pirates were Muslims. When Washington was president, twenty percent of the federal budget went to pay extorsion to them. Approximately a million Europeans and Americans were taken captive and sold into slavery by the Barbary Pirates. The men were often killed or held for ransom. The women and female children were typically sold as sex slaves. The male children were often castrated, because eunuchs brought a better price in the slave market. Castration often resulted in death from infection or bleeding.

A diplomat that represented the coast of northern Africa was asked by Thomas Jefferson and John Adams, who were serving as diplomats, how he could justify the piracy. He responded by saying that Islam taught that piracy was permissable as long as the victim was an infidel.

Not much has changed.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ui8OCiZsWGw

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barbary_pirates

[LexusLover]

More guns on campus ....
http://news.yahoo.com/no-charges-aga...191542774.html

Problem Solving 101.

[timpage]

Originally Posted by Sidewinder

Poet, would you care to cite the cases?

Prior to DC v. Heller, the Supreme Court touched the Second Amendment precisely three times.

Or perhaps you'd cite the cases where the right was infringed, the case was appealed to the Supreme Court, and the Court declined to review.

I invite you to observe that I'm not holding my breath...

I could find hundreds of those cases for you if I felt like doing the research. Here's just one that took me 15 seconds to find:

National Rifle Association, et al v. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco & Firearms. 5th Circuit case. Decided October 2012. NRA filed suit contending that government regulations outlawing the sale of handguns to persons under the age of 21 was an infringement of those persons' Second Amendment rights. Summary judgment for the government, affirmed by the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals.

Cert filed with the SCOTUS and pending. Want to make a bet on the outcome?

[timpage]

Originally Posted by joe bloe

Supreme court rulings don't change the meaning of the Constitution. If SCOTUS allows infringement of the right to bear arms, that doesn't change the meaning of the second amendment; shall not be infringed still means shall not be infringed. SCOTUS isn't God clarifying the meaning of the Bible. A five to four ruling today can be overturned by another five to four ruling tomorrow.

I missed God's last opinion on the bible. Where are those published? Because it seems to me that based on the fact the bible seems to mean something different to almost every preacher I've ever heard, maybe they could use some guidance.

Rule of law, Joe. Have you heard the term? Sorry, but the SCOTUS interprets the meaning of the Constitution under our system of government.

You may not like it, but Second Amendment rights are not unlimited and the SCOTUS has made clear that limitation on those rights don't constitute an infringement within the meaning of the Second Amendment. You don't have a right to own any weapon you like. You don't have a right to carry any weapon you like anywhere you like. If you're 18 years old, you can't purchase a handgun. If you're a felon, you can't own a firearm. If you're mentally disturbed you can't purchase a firearm. Laws prohibiting the carrying of weapons into schools, government buildings and privately-owned commercial enterprises have all been upheld. You can't own a fully automatic weapon, a shotgun with a barrel less than 18 inches, a rifle with a barrel less than 16 inches (unless you possess the proper NFA licenses) and on and on. Those are all prohibitions on the ownership and use of firearms and legally, per the SCOTUS, those laws do not infringe on your constitutional rights.

Like it or not, the Second Amendment means what the SCOTUS says it means.