This is the future if you don't vote. Socialists will eventually seize your guns. They have zero respect for the 2nd amendment. Putting cops in this position is unforgivable. Whoever is in charge of that state should be fucking arrested for violating the constitution.
See below OBK. It doesn't matter if the Reds respect it or not. 26% or more of the states in this country aren't abandoning the 2nd amendment.
The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.
The intention of the "anti-gun" people has never been to repeal the 2nd for the obvious reasons you state. It's too damn difficult and it's against popular opinion.
Instead, it's always been to attempt to re-frame the conversation and pass laws such as the "assault weapons ban" to make owning a firearm legally an extremely difficult task. Always in the name of public safety.
If I can only buy firearms licensed and regulated by the state it kind of defeats the point of them being a check and balance on the state's power.
argumentum ad absurdum: The 2nd amendment isn't repealed but "common sense" laws are passed that only guns produced by Racebannon can be legally sold and kept. Oh what's that you say? Race doesn't produce any guns? Tough shit, it's the law.
If you don't think federal regulators would ever make such nonsense laws then you've never dealt with a federal regulator.
Agree. Let's get rid of ALL nonsensical regulations of our right to own whatever ever firearms we want.
See there you go again Yella with a binary argument as though I'm some cheap Two silver dollar libertarian. You should know me better than that. I don't deal in absolutes when it comes to policy.
The poont of the 2nd has been and should always be a check on the power of the state.
Instead of an arms race between civilians and the state how about we scale back the military industrial complex? or the surveillance state? capisci?
And yes, I think the licensing program for full auto actually should be expanded as I'm not sure there's ever been a mass shooting in modern American History that has involved a licensed automatic weapon. If you provide me evidence to the contrary I would be open to altering my opinion.
I don't think of you as a cheap two silver dollar libertarian who only deals in absolutes. But as the oft stated cliché goes, where do you logically draw the line between what firearms we should have the right to own? It's a pretty flimsy position in my view (not saying you are so don't twist) to be for semi-auto AR style rifles, but against fully auto. And furthermore, if people truly believe that guns are the PRIMARY guarantor of liberty, then the citizenry should, in fact, be armed as heavily as possible to provide an adequate check on future tyranny. On a side note - while I think having a 2nd amendment certainly isn't a bad thing - I contend that is not the primary reason we are a free people; rather, this is more so due to the fact that we are country which was founded by brilliant men who were products of the English Enlightenment (that they were protestants played a big role too).
It's pointless to worry about the military industrial complex. It was a necessary evil forced upon us? by external actors. Furthermore, it's probably been more of a net positive to our nation than a negative. Think of all the kewl shit we have today as a result of all that Cold War R&D spending. Surveillance state is a necessary evil as well; if the A-rabs or whomever kill another 3,000 Americans, then we're going to get Patriot Act on steroids. The fact that we haven't had a major domestic terrorist attack in 17 years suggests that there is some ROI.
Reasonable discourse on HH. An uncommon thing.
The tug should be a place for gentelmens and scholars.
The DailyKos style retort of "oh you're gonna resist tyranny with a shotgun huh?" is lazy. And the tough guy responses are usually just as lazy and simple. No, we? are not going to resist M-1s and @Dardanus sticky loads of death from the sky. However, imposing some kind of tyrannical police state upon an armed citizenry, which Trump is sure to do any moment, comes at a much, much higher cost than upon an unarmed citizenry. The Feds cannot pacify, say, Cheyenne with merely harsh words. Significant force and manpower must be used, and that in itself is a check on tyranny. But that's all doomsday scenario shit that is, hopefully, held in check by our system. A system which includes a legal armed citizenry.
The more important part is the #resistance of the soft tyranny of dependency.
Eh, I had a whole bunch moar shit to right on that, but seems like a lot of work now.
Agree. As I stated a moment ago, I think having a 2nd Amendment is a good thing and the Founders were smart to put one in the document. But it's lazy and overly simplistic to point to it as the primary reason we are a free people.
This is the future if you don't vote. Socialists will eventually seize your guns. They have zero respect for the 2nd amendment. Putting cops in this position is unforgivable. Whoever is in charge of that state should be fucking arrested for violating the constitution.
See below OBK. It doesn't matter if the Reds respect it or not. 26% or more of the states in this country aren't abandoning the 2nd amendment.
The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.
The intention of the "anti-gun" people has never been to repeal the 2nd for the obvious reasons you state. It's too damn difficult and it's against popular opinion.
Instead, it's always been to attempt to re-frame the conversation and pass laws such as the "assault weapons ban" to make owning a firearm legally an extremely difficult task. Always in the name of public safety.
If I can only buy firearms licensed and regulated by the state it kind of defeats the point of them being a check and balance on the state's power.
argumentum ad absurdum: The 2nd amendment isn't repealed but "common sense" laws are passed that only guns produced by Racebannon can be legally sold and kept. Oh what's that you say? Race doesn't produce any guns? Tough shit, it's the law.
If you don't think federal regulators would ever make such nonsense laws then you've never dealt with a federal regulator.
Agree. Let's get rid of ALL nonsensical regulations of our right to own whatever ever firearms we want.
See there you go again Yella with a binary argument as though I'm some cheap Two silver dollar libertarian. You should know me better than that. I don't deal in absolutes when it comes to policy.
The poont of the 2nd has been and should always be a check on the power of the state.
Instead of an arms race between civilians and the state how about we scale back the military industrial complex? or the surveillance state? capisci?
And yes, I think the licensing program for full auto actually should be expanded as I'm not sure there's ever been a mass shooting in modern American History that has involved a licensed automatic weapon. If you provide me evidence to the contrary I would be open to altering my opinion.
I don't think of you as a cheap two silver dollar libertarian who only deals in absolutes. But as the oft stated cliché goes, where do you logically draw the line between what firearms we should have the right to own? It's a pretty flimsy position in my view (not saying you are so don't twist) to be for semi-auto AR style rifles, but against fully auto. And furthermore, if people truly believe that guns are the PRIMARY guarantor of liberty, then the citizenry should, in fact, be armed as heavily as possible to provide an adequate check on future tyranny. On a side note - while I think having a 2nd amendment certainly isn't a bad thing - I contend that is not the primary reason we are a free people; rather, this is more so due to the fact that we are country which was founded by brilliant men who were products of the English Enlightenment (that they were protestants played a big role too).
It's pointless to worry about the military industrial complex. It was a necessary evil forced upon us? by external actors. Furthermore, it's probably been more of a net positive to our nation than a negative. Think of all the kewl shit we have today as a result of all that Cold War R&D spending. Surveillance state is a necessary evil as well; if the A-rabs or whomever kill another 3,000 Americans, then we're going to get Patriot Act on steroids. The fact that we haven't had a major domestic terrorist attack in 17 years suggests that there is some ROI.
This is the future if you don't vote. Socialists will eventually seize your guns. They have zero respect for the 2nd amendment. Putting cops in this position is unforgivable. Whoever is in charge of that state should be fucking arrested for violating the constitution.
See below OBK. It doesn't matter if the Reds respect it or not. 26% or more of the states in this country aren't abandoning the 2nd amendment.
The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.
The intention of the "anti-gun" people has never been to repeal the 2nd for the obvious reasons you state. It's too damn difficult and it's against popular opinion.
Instead, it's always been to attempt to re-frame the conversation and pass laws such as the "assault weapons ban" to make owning a firearm legally an extremely difficult task. Always in the name of public safety.
If I can only buy firearms licensed and regulated by the state it kind of defeats the point of them being a check and balance on the state's power.
argumentum ad absurdum: The 2nd amendment isn't repealed but "common sense" laws are passed that only guns produced by Racebannon can be legally sold and kept. Oh what's that you say? Race doesn't produce any guns? Tough shit, it's the law.
If you don't think federal regulators would ever make such nonsense laws then you've never dealt with a federal regulator.
Agree. Let's get rid of ALL nonsensical regulations of our right to own whatever ever firearms we want.
See there you go again Yella with a binary argument as though I'm some cheap Two silver dollar libertarian. You should know me better than that. I don't deal in absolutes when it comes to policy.
The poont of the 2nd has been and should always be a check on the power of the state.
Instead of an arms race between civilians and the state how about we scale back the military industrial complex? or the surveillance state? capisci?
And yes, I think the licensing program for full auto actually should be expanded as I'm not sure there's ever been a mass shooting in modern American History that has involved a licensed automatic weapon. If you provide me evidence to the contrary I would be open to altering my opinion.
I don't think of you as a cheap two silver dollar libertarian who only deals in absolutes. But as the oft stated cliché goes, where do you logically draw the line between what firearms we should have the right to own? It's a pretty flimsy position in my view (not saying you are so don't twist) to be for semi-auto AR style rifles, but against fully auto. And furthermore, if people truly believe that guns are the PRIMARY guarantor of liberty, then the citizenry should, in fact, be armed as heavily as possible to provide an adequate check on future tyranny. On a side note - while I think having a 2nd amendment certainly isn't a bad thing - I contend that is not the primary reason we are a free people; rather, this is more so due to the fact that we are country which was founded by brilliant men who were products of the English Enlightenment (that they were protestants played a big role too).
It's pointless to worry about the military industrial complex. It was a necessary evil forced upon us? by external actors. Furthermore, it's probably been more of a net positive to our nation than a negative. Think of all the kewl shit we have today as a result of all that Cold War R&D spending. Surveillance state is a necessary evil as well; if the A-rabs or whomever kill another 3,000 Americans, then we're going to get Patriot Act on steroids. The fact that we haven't had a major domestic terrorist attack in 17 years suggests that there is some ROI.
Disagree.
We had guns. Problem is we were a bunch of losers still. If we had established a winning kultur by then Canada would be ours? and Worshington wouldn't have been torched.
This is the future if you don't vote. Socialists will eventually seize your guns. They have zero respect for the 2nd amendment. Putting cops in this position is unforgivable. Whoever is in charge of that state should be fucking arrested for violating the constitution.
See below OBK. It doesn't matter if the Reds respect it or not. 26% or more of the states in this country aren't abandoning the 2nd amendment.
The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.
The intention of the "anti-gun" people has never been to repeal the 2nd for the obvious reasons you state. It's too damn difficult and it's against popular opinion.
Instead, it's always been to attempt to re-frame the conversation and pass laws such as the "assault weapons ban" to make owning a firearm legally an extremely difficult task. Always in the name of public safety.
If I can only buy firearms licensed and regulated by the state it kind of defeats the point of them being a check and balance on the state's power.
argumentum ad absurdum: The 2nd amendment isn't repealed but "common sense" laws are passed that only guns produced by Racebannon can be legally sold and kept. Oh what's that you say? Race doesn't produce any guns? Tough shit, it's the law.
If you don't think federal regulators would ever make such nonsense laws then you've never dealt with a federal regulator.
Agree. Let's get rid of ALL nonsensical regulations of our right to own whatever ever firearms we want.
See there you go again Yella with a binary argument as though I'm some cheap Two silver dollar libertarian. You should know me better than that. I don't deal in absolutes when it comes to policy.
The poont of the 2nd has been and should always be a check on the power of the state.
Instead of an arms race between civilians and the state how about we scale back the military industrial complex? or the surveillance state? capisci?
And yes, I think the licensing program for full auto actually should be expanded as I'm not sure there's ever been a mass shooting in modern American History that has involved a licensed automatic weapon. If you provide me evidence to the contrary I would be open to altering my opinion.
I don't think of you as a cheap two silver dollar libertarian who only deals in absolutes. But as the oft stated cliché goes, where do you logically draw the line between what firearms we should have the right to own? It's a pretty flimsy position in my view (not saying you are so don't twist) to be for semi-auto AR style rifles, but against fully auto. And furthermore, if people truly believe that guns are the PRIMARY guarantor of liberty, then the citizenry should, in fact, be armed as heavily as possible to provide an adequate check on future tyranny. On a side note - while I think having a 2nd amendment certainly isn't a bad thing - I contend that is not the primary reason we are a free people; rather, this is more so due to the fact that we are country which was founded by brilliant men who were products of the English Enlightenment (that they were protestants played a big role too).
It's pointless to worry about the military industrial complex. It was a necessary evil forced upon us? by external actors. Furthermore, it's probably been more of a net positive to our nation than a negative. Think of all the kewl shit we have today as a result of all that Cold War R&D spending. Surveillance state is a necessary evil as well; if the A-rabs or whomever kill another 3,000 Americans, then we're going to get Patriot Act on steroids. The fact that we haven't had a major domestic terrorist attack in 17 years suggests that there is some ROI.
I mean in my imaginary anarcho-captilist state we could all have F-14's and be flying around like assholes while drunk and watching @Swaye bang hookers.
That's imaginary though so dealing in the real world of complexity, compromises, history, context, and geography?
I'd like to see an expansion of our current automatic weapons licensing program.
A new emphasis on "gun security" i.e. having lockboxes, storing ammo separately, secure locations, etc. Per the research and statistics this more than anything reduces 1)Suicides and 2) Homicides due to domestic violence. Both of which are two of the leaders in gun deaths.
A large tangential topic but mental health solutions/efforts.
A reduction in the militarization of the police and it's surveillance state. I'd add from some of my side voluntary work that "soft" skills training for police officers could go a loooooonnnng way to improving things and reducing the need for violent confrontations between civilians and police.
An armed(and not ill prepared for duty) set of officers at schools with more than a revolver stored securely in their vehicle. I had them in my highschool and it didn't traumatize me.
Idk that's a decent start to the Doog_Bot platform.
This is the future if you don't vote. Socialists will eventually seize your guns. They have zero respect for the 2nd amendment. Putting cops in this position is unforgivable. Whoever is in charge of that state should be fucking arrested for violating the constitution.
See below OBK. It doesn't matter if the Reds respect it or not. 26% or more of the states in this country aren't abandoning the 2nd amendment.
The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.
The intention of the "anti-gun" people has never been to repeal the 2nd for the obvious reasons you state. It's too damn difficult and it's against popular opinion.
Instead, it's always been to attempt to re-frame the conversation and pass laws such as the "assault weapons ban" to make owning a firearm legally an extremely difficult task. Always in the name of public safety.
If I can only buy firearms licensed and regulated by the state it kind of defeats the point of them being a check and balance on the state's power.
argumentum ad absurdum: The 2nd amendment isn't repealed but "common sense" laws are passed that only guns produced by Racebannon can be legally sold and kept. Oh what's that you say? Race doesn't produce any guns? Tough shit, it's the law.
If you don't think federal regulators would ever make such nonsense laws then you've never dealt with a federal regulator.
Agree. Let's get rid of ALL nonsensical regulations of our right to own whatever ever firearms we want.
See there you go again Yella with a binary argument as though I'm some cheap Two silver dollar libertarian. You should know me better than that. I don't deal in absolutes when it comes to policy.
The poont of the 2nd has been and should always be a check on the power of the state.
Instead of an arms race between civilians and the state how about we scale back the military industrial complex? or the surveillance state? capisci?
And yes, I think the licensing program for full auto actually should be expanded as I'm not sure there's ever been a mass shooting in modern American History that has involved a licensed automatic weapon. If you provide me evidence to the contrary I would be open to altering my opinion.
I don't think of you as a cheap two silver dollar libertarian who only deals in absolutes. But as the oft stated cliché goes, where do you logically draw the line between what firearms we should have the right to own? It's a pretty flimsy position in my view (not saying you are so don't twist) to be for semi-auto AR style rifles, but against fully auto. And furthermore, if people truly believe that guns are the PRIMARY guarantor of liberty, then the citizenry should, in fact, be armed as heavily as possible to provide an adequate check on future tyranny. On a side note - while I think having a 2nd amendment certainly isn't a bad thing - I contend that is not the primary reason we are a free people; rather, this is more so due to the fact that we are country which was founded by brilliant men who were products of the English Enlightenment (that they were protestants played a big role too).
It's pointless to worry about the military industrial complex. It was a necessary evil forced upon us? by external actors. Furthermore, it's probably been more of a net positive to our nation than a negative. Think of all the kewl shit we have today as a result of all that Cold War R&D spending. Surveillance state is a necessary evil as well; if the A-rabs or whomever kill another 3,000 Americans, then we're going to get Patriot Act on steroids. The fact that we haven't had a major domestic terrorist attack in 17 years suggests that there is some ROI.
Disagree.
We had guns. Problem is we were a bunch of losers still. If we had established a winning kultur by then Canada would be ours? and Worshington wouldn't have been torched.
This is the future if you don't vote. Socialists will eventually seize your guns. They have zero respect for the 2nd amendment. Putting cops in this position is unforgivable. Whoever is in charge of that state should be fucking arrested for violating the constitution.
See below OBK. It doesn't matter if the Reds respect it or not. 26% or more of the states in this country aren't abandoning the 2nd amendment.
The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.
The intention of the "anti-gun" people has never been to repeal the 2nd for the obvious reasons you state. It's too damn difficult and it's against popular opinion.
Instead, it's always been to attempt to re-frame the conversation and pass laws such as the "assault weapons ban" to make owning a firearm legally an extremely difficult task. Always in the name of public safety.
If I can only buy firearms licensed and regulated by the state it kind of defeats the point of them being a check and balance on the state's power.
argumentum ad absurdum: The 2nd amendment isn't repealed but "common sense" laws are passed that only guns produced by Racebannon can be legally sold and kept. Oh what's that you say? Race doesn't produce any guns? Tough shit, it's the law.
If you don't think federal regulators would ever make such nonsense laws then you've never dealt with a federal regulator.
Agree. Let's get rid of ALL nonsensical regulations of our right to own whatever ever firearms we want.
See there you go again Yella with a binary argument as though I'm some cheap Two silver dollar libertarian. You should know me better than that. I don't deal in absolutes when it comes to policy.
The poont of the 2nd has been and should always be a check on the power of the state.
Instead of an arms race between civilians and the state how about we scale back the military industrial complex? or the surveillance state? capisci?
And yes, I think the licensing program for full auto actually should be expanded as I'm not sure there's ever been a mass shooting in modern American History that has involved a licensed automatic weapon. If you provide me evidence to the contrary I would be open to altering my opinion.
I don't think of you as a cheap two silver dollar libertarian who only deals in absolutes. But as the oft stated cliché goes, where do you logically draw the line between what firearms we should have the right to own? It's a pretty flimsy position in my view (not saying you are so don't twist) to be for semi-auto AR style rifles, but against fully auto. And furthermore, if people truly believe that guns are the PRIMARY guarantor of liberty, then the citizenry should, in fact, be armed as heavily as possible to provide an adequate check on future tyranny. On a side note - while I think having a 2nd amendment certainly isn't a bad thing - I contend that is not the primary reason we are a free people; rather, this is more so due to the fact that we are country which was founded by brilliant men who were products of the English Enlightenment (that they were protestants played a big role too).
It's pointless to worry about the military industrial complex. It was a necessary evil forced upon us? by external actors. Furthermore, it's probably been more of a net positive to our nation than a negative. Think of all the kewl shit we have today as a result of all that Cold War R&D spending. Surveillance state is a necessary evil as well; if the A-rabs or whomever kill another 3,000 Americans, then we're going to get Patriot Act on steroids. The fact that we haven't had a major domestic terrorist attack in 17 years suggests that there is some ROI.
Disagree.
We had guns. Problem is we were a bunch of losers still. If we had established a winning kultur by then Canada would be ours? and Worshington wouldn't have been torched.
Canada AND Baja California damn it!
We could have had all of Mexico and Canada, damn it.
This is the future if you don't vote. Socialists will eventually seize your guns. They have zero respect for the 2nd amendment. Putting cops in this position is unforgivable. Whoever is in charge of that state should be fucking arrested for violating the constitution.
See below OBK. It doesn't matter if the Reds respect it or not. 26% or more of the states in this country aren't abandoning the 2nd amendment.
The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.
The intention of the "anti-gun" people has never been to repeal the 2nd for the obvious reasons you state. It's too damn difficult and it's against popular opinion.
Instead, it's always been to attempt to re-frame the conversation and pass laws such as the "assault weapons ban" to make owning a firearm legally an extremely difficult task. Always in the name of public safety.
If I can only buy firearms licensed and regulated by the state it kind of defeats the point of them being a check and balance on the state's power.
argumentum ad absurdum: The 2nd amendment isn't repealed but "common sense" laws are passed that only guns produced by Racebannon can be legally sold and kept. Oh what's that you say? Race doesn't produce any guns? Tough shit, it's the law.
If you don't think federal regulators would ever make such nonsense laws then you've never dealt with a federal regulator.
Agree. Let's get rid of ALL nonsensical regulations of our right to own whatever ever firearms we want.
See there you go again Yella with a binary argument as though I'm some cheap Two silver dollar libertarian. You should know me better than that. I don't deal in absolutes when it comes to policy.
The poont of the 2nd has been and should always be a check on the power of the state.
Instead of an arms race between civilians and the state how about we scale back the military industrial complex? or the surveillance state? capisci?
And yes, I think the licensing program for full auto actually should be expanded as I'm not sure there's ever been a mass shooting in modern American History that has involved a licensed automatic weapon. If you provide me evidence to the contrary I would be open to altering my opinion.
I don't think of you as a cheap two silver dollar libertarian who only deals in absolutes. But as the oft stated cliché goes, where do you logically draw the line between what firearms we should have the right to own? It's a pretty flimsy position in my view (not saying you are so don't twist) to be for semi-auto AR style rifles, but against fully auto. And furthermore, if people truly believe that guns are the PRIMARY guarantor of liberty, then the citizenry should, in fact, be armed as heavily as possible to provide an adequate check on future tyranny. On a side note - while I think having a 2nd amendment certainly isn't a bad thing - I contend that is not the primary reason we are a free people; rather, this is more so due to the fact that we are country which was founded by brilliant men who were products of the English Enlightenment (that they were protestants played a big role too).
It's pointless to worry about the military industrial complex. It was a necessary evil forced upon us? by external actors. Furthermore, it's probably been more of a net positive to our nation than a negative. Think of all the kewl shit we have today as a result of all that Cold War R&D spending. Surveillance state is a necessary evil as well; if the A-rabs or whomever kill another 3,000 Americans, then we're going to get Patriot Act on steroids. The fact that we haven't had a major domestic terrorist attack in 17 years suggests that there is some ROI.
Disagree.
We had guns. Problem is we were a bunch of losers still. If we had established a winning kultur by then Canada would be ours? and Worshington wouldn't have been torched.
Canada AND Baja California damn it!
We could have had all of Mexico and Canada, damn it.
This is the future if you don't vote. Socialists will eventually seize your guns. They have zero respect for the 2nd amendment. Putting cops in this position is unforgivable. Whoever is in charge of that state should be fucking arrested for violating the constitution.
See below OBK. It doesn't matter if the Reds respect it or not. 26% or more of the states in this country aren't abandoning the 2nd amendment.
The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.
The intention of the "anti-gun" people has never been to repeal the 2nd for the obvious reasons you state. It's too damn difficult and it's against popular opinion.
Instead, it's always been to attempt to re-frame the conversation and pass laws such as the "assault weapons ban" to make owning a firearm legally an extremely difficult task. Always in the name of public safety.
If I can only buy firearms licensed and regulated by the state it kind of defeats the point of them being a check and balance on the state's power.
argumentum ad absurdum: The 2nd amendment isn't repealed but "common sense" laws are passed that only guns produced by Racebannon can be legally sold and kept. Oh what's that you say? Race doesn't produce any guns? Tough shit, it's the law.
If you don't think federal regulators would ever make such nonsense laws then you've never dealt with a federal regulator.
Agree. Let's get rid of ALL nonsensical regulations of our right to own whatever ever firearms we want.
See there you go again Yella with a binary argument as though I'm some cheap Two silver dollar libertarian. You should know me better than that. I don't deal in absolutes when it comes to policy.
The poont of the 2nd has been and should always be a check on the power of the state.
Instead of an arms race between civilians and the state how about we scale back the military industrial complex? or the surveillance state? capisci?
And yes, I think the licensing program for full auto actually should be expanded as I'm not sure there's ever been a mass shooting in modern American History that has involved a licensed automatic weapon. If you provide me evidence to the contrary I would be open to altering my opinion.
I don't think of you as a cheap two silver dollar libertarian who only deals in absolutes. But as the oft stated cliché goes, where do you logically draw the line between what firearms we should have the right to own? It's a pretty flimsy position in my view (not saying you are so don't twist) to be for semi-auto AR style rifles, but against fully auto. And furthermore, if people truly believe that guns are the PRIMARY guarantor of liberty, then the citizenry should, in fact, be armed as heavily as possible to provide an adequate check on future tyranny. On a side note - while I think having a 2nd amendment certainly isn't a bad thing - I contend that is not the primary reason we are a free people; rather, this is more so due to the fact that we are country which was founded by brilliant men who were products of the English Enlightenment (that they were protestants played a big role too).
It's pointless to worry about the military industrial complex. It was a necessary evil forced upon us? by external actors. Furthermore, it's probably been more of a net positive to our nation than a negative. Think of all the kewl shit we have today as a result of all that Cold War R&D spending. Surveillance state is a necessary evil as well; if the A-rabs or whomever kill another 3,000 Americans, then we're going to get Patriot Act on steroids. The fact that we haven't had a major domestic terrorist attack in 17 years suggests that there is some ROI.
Disagree.
We had guns. Problem is we were a bunch of losers still. If we had established a winning kultur by then Canada would be ours? and Worshington wouldn't have been torched.
Canada AND Baja California damn it!
We could have had all of Mexico and Canada, damn it.
The USA just needed more time to get its reads down
This is the future if you don't vote. Socialists will eventually seize your guns. They have zero respect for the 2nd amendment. Putting cops in this position is unforgivable. Whoever is in charge of that state should be fucking arrested for violating the constitution.
See below OBK. It doesn't matter if the Reds respect it or not. 26% or more of the states in this country aren't abandoning the 2nd amendment.
The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.
The intention of the "anti-gun" people has never been to repeal the 2nd for the obvious reasons you state. It's too damn difficult and it's against popular opinion.
Instead, it's always been to attempt to re-frame the conversation and pass laws such as the "assault weapons ban" to make owning a firearm legally an extremely difficult task. Always in the name of public safety.
If I can only buy firearms licensed and regulated by the state it kind of defeats the point of them being a check and balance on the state's power.
argumentum ad absurdum: The 2nd amendment isn't repealed but "common sense" laws are passed that only guns produced by Racebannon can be legally sold and kept. Oh what's that you say? Race doesn't produce any guns? Tough shit, it's the law.
If you don't think federal regulators would ever make such nonsense laws then you've never dealt with a federal regulator.
Agree. Let's get rid of ALL nonsensical regulations of our right to own whatever ever firearms we want.
See there you go again Yella with a binary argument as though I'm some cheap Two silver dollar libertarian. You should know me better than that. I don't deal in absolutes when it comes to policy.
The poont of the 2nd has been and should always be a check on the power of the state.
Instead of an arms race between civilians and the state how about we scale back the military industrial complex? or the surveillance state? capisci?
And yes, I think the licensing program for full auto actually should be expanded as I'm not sure there's ever been a mass shooting in modern American History that has involved a licensed automatic weapon. If you provide me evidence to the contrary I would be open to altering my opinion.
I don't think of you as a cheap two silver dollar libertarian who only deals in absolutes. But as the oft stated cliché goes, where do you logically draw the line between what firearms we should have the right to own? It's a pretty flimsy position in my view (not saying you are so don't twist) to be for semi-auto AR style rifles, but against fully auto. And furthermore, if people truly believe that guns are the PRIMARY guarantor of liberty, then the citizenry should, in fact, be armed as heavily as possible to provide an adequate check on future tyranny. On a side note - while I think having a 2nd amendment certainly isn't a bad thing - I contend that is not the primary reason we are a free people; rather, this is more so due to the fact that we are country which was founded by brilliant men who were products of the English Enlightenment (that they were protestants played a big role too).
It's pointless to worry about the military industrial complex. It was a necessary evil forced upon us? by external actors. Furthermore, it's probably been more of a net positive to our nation than a negative. Think of all the kewl shit we have today as a result of all that Cold War R&D spending. Surveillance state is a necessary evil as well; if the A-rabs or whomever kill another 3,000 Americans, then we're going to get Patriot Act on steroids. The fact that we haven't had a major domestic terrorist attack in 17 years suggests that there is some ROI.
I mean in my imaginary anarcho-captilist state we could all have F-14's and be flying around like assholes while drunk and watching @Swaye bang hookers.
That's imaginary though so dealing in the real world of complexity, compromises, history, context, and geography?
I'd like to see an expansion of our current automatic weapons licensing program.
A new emphasis on "gun security" i.e. having lockboxes, storing ammo separately, secure locations, etc. Per the research and statistics this more than anything reduces 1)Suicides and 2) Homicides due to domestic violence. Both of which are two of the leaders in gun deaths.
A large tangential topic but mental health solutions/efforts.
A reduction in the militarization of the police and it's surveillance state. I'd add from some of my side voluntary work that "soft" skills training for police officers could go a loooooonnnng way to improving things and reducing the need for violent confrontations between civilians and police.
An armed(and not ill prepared for duty) set of officers at schools with more than a revolver stored securely in their vehicle. I had them in my highschool and it didn't traumatize me.
Idk that's a decent start to the Doog_Bot platform.
This is the future if you don't vote. Socialists will eventually seize your guns. They have zero respect for the 2nd amendment. Putting cops in this position is unforgivable. Whoever is in charge of that state should be fucking arrested for violating the constitution.
See below OBK. It doesn't matter if the Reds respect it or not. 26% or more of the states in this country aren't abandoning the 2nd amendment.
The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.
The intention of the "anti-gun" people has never been to repeal the 2nd for the obvious reasons you state. It's too damn difficult and it's against popular opinion.
Instead, it's always been to attempt to re-frame the conversation and pass laws such as the "assault weapons ban" to make owning a firearm legally an extremely difficult task. Always in the name of public safety.
If I can only buy firearms licensed and regulated by the state it kind of defeats the point of them being a check and balance on the state's power.
argumentum ad absurdum: The 2nd amendment isn't repealed but "common sense" laws are passed that only guns produced by Racebannon can be legally sold and kept. Oh what's that you say? Race doesn't produce any guns? Tough shit, it's the law.
If you don't think federal regulators would ever make such nonsense laws then you've never dealt with a federal regulator.
Agree. Let's get rid of ALL nonsensical regulations of our right to own whatever ever firearms we want.
See there you go again Yella with a binary argument as though I'm some cheap Two silver dollar libertarian. You should know me better than that. I don't deal in absolutes when it comes to policy.
The poont of the 2nd has been and should always be a check on the power of the state.
Instead of an arms race between civilians and the state how about we scale back the military industrial complex? or the surveillance state? capisci?
And yes, I think the licensing program for full auto actually should be expanded as I'm not sure there's ever been a mass shooting in modern American History that has involved a licensed automatic weapon. If you provide me evidence to the contrary I would be open to altering my opinion.
I don't think of you as a cheap two silver dollar libertarian who only deals in absolutes. But as the oft stated cliché goes, where do you logically draw the line between what firearms we should have the right to own? It's a pretty flimsy position in my view (not saying you are so don't twist) to be for semi-auto AR style rifles, but against fully auto. And furthermore, if people truly believe that guns are the PRIMARY guarantor of liberty, then the citizenry should, in fact, be armed as heavily as possible to provide an adequate check on future tyranny. On a side note - while I think having a 2nd amendment certainly isn't a bad thing - I contend that is not the primary reason we are a free people; rather, this is more so due to the fact that we are country which was founded by brilliant men who were products of the English Enlightenment (that they were protestants played a big role too).
It's pointless to worry about the military industrial complex. It was a necessary evil forced upon us? by external actors. Furthermore, it's probably been more of a net positive to our nation than a negative. Think of all the kewl shit we have today as a result of all that Cold War R&D spending. Surveillance state is a necessary evil as well; if the A-rabs or whomever kill another 3,000 Americans, then we're going to get Patriot Act on steroids. The fact that we haven't had a major domestic terrorist attack in 17 years suggests that there is some ROI.
Disagree.
We had guns. Problem is we were a bunch of losers still. If we had established a winning kultur by then Canada would be ours? and Worshington wouldn't have been torched.
Canada AND Baja California damn it!
We could have had all of Mexico and Canada, damn it.
I've lived there. Trust me, WDWHA.
WDWHA cuz (1) Northern states didn't want to incorporate that amount of future slave territory and (2) it would have meant governing too many Messicans. Population of California in 1848 was only like 80,000 give or take.
This is the future if you don't vote. Socialists will eventually seize your guns. They have zero respect for the 2nd amendment. Putting cops in this position is unforgivable. Whoever is in charge of that state should be fucking arrested for violating the constitution.
See below OBK. It doesn't matter if the Reds respect it or not. 26% or more of the states in this country aren't abandoning the 2nd amendment.
The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.
The intention of the "anti-gun" people has never been to repeal the 2nd for the obvious reasons you state. It's too damn difficult and it's against popular opinion.
Instead, it's always been to attempt to re-frame the conversation and pass laws such as the "assault weapons ban" to make owning a firearm legally an extremely difficult task. Always in the name of public safety.
If I can only buy firearms licensed and regulated by the state it kind of defeats the point of them being a check and balance on the state's power.
argumentum ad absurdum: The 2nd amendment isn't repealed but "common sense" laws are passed that only guns produced by Racebannon can be legally sold and kept. Oh what's that you say? Race doesn't produce any guns? Tough shit, it's the law.
If you don't think federal regulators would ever make such nonsense laws then you've never dealt with a federal regulator.
Agree. Let's get rid of ALL nonsensical regulations of our right to own whatever ever firearms we want.
See there you go again Yella with a binary argument as though I'm some cheap Two silver dollar libertarian. You should know me better than that. I don't deal in absolutes when it comes to policy.
The poont of the 2nd has been and should always be a check on the power of the state.
Instead of an arms race between civilians and the state how about we scale back the military industrial complex? or the surveillance state? capisci?
And yes, I think the licensing program for full auto actually should be expanded as I'm not sure there's ever been a mass shooting in modern American History that has involved a licensed automatic weapon. If you provide me evidence to the contrary I would be open to altering my opinion.
I don't think of you as a cheap two silver dollar libertarian who only deals in absolutes. But as the oft stated cliché goes, where do you logically draw the line between what firearms we should have the right to own? It's a pretty flimsy position in my view (not saying you are so don't twist) to be for semi-auto AR style rifles, but against fully auto. And furthermore, if people truly believe that guns are the PRIMARY guarantor of liberty, then the citizenry should, in fact, be armed as heavily as possible to provide an adequate check on future tyranny. On a side note - while I think having a 2nd amendment certainly isn't a bad thing - I contend that is not the primary reason we are a free people; rather, this is more so due to the fact that we are country which was founded by brilliant men who were products of the English Enlightenment (that they were protestants played a big role too).
It's pointless to worry about the military industrial complex. It was a necessary evil forced upon us? by external actors. Furthermore, it's probably been more of a net positive to our nation than a negative. Think of all the kewl shit we have today as a result of all that Cold War R&D spending. Surveillance state is a necessary evil as well; if the A-rabs or whomever kill another 3,000 Americans, then we're going to get Patriot Act on steroids. The fact that we haven't had a major domestic terrorist attack in 17 years suggests that there is some ROI.
Disagree.
We had guns. Problem is we were a bunch of losers still. If we had established a winning kultur by then Canada would be ours? and Worshington wouldn't have been torched.
Canada AND Baja California damn it!
We could have had all of Mexico and Canada, damn it.
This is the future if you don't vote. Socialists will eventually seize your guns. They have zero respect for the 2nd amendment. Putting cops in this position is unforgivable. Whoever is in charge of that state should be fucking arrested for violating the constitution.
See below OBK. It doesn't matter if the Reds respect it or not. 26% or more of the states in this country aren't abandoning the 2nd amendment.
The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.
The intention of the "anti-gun" people has never been to repeal the 2nd for the obvious reasons you state. It's too damn difficult and it's against popular opinion.
Instead, it's always been to attempt to re-frame the conversation and pass laws such as the "assault weapons ban" to make owning a firearm legally an extremely difficult task. Always in the name of public safety.
If I can only buy firearms licensed and regulated by the state it kind of defeats the point of them being a check and balance on the state's power.
argumentum ad absurdum: The 2nd amendment isn't repealed but "common sense" laws are passed that only guns produced by Racebannon can be legally sold and kept. Oh what's that you say? Race doesn't produce any guns? Tough shit, it's the law.
If you don't think federal regulators would ever make such nonsense laws then you've never dealt with a federal regulator.
Agree. Let's get rid of ALL nonsensical regulations of our right to own whatever ever firearms we want.
See there you go again Yella with a binary argument as though I'm some cheap Two silver dollar libertarian. You should know me better than that. I don't deal in absolutes when it comes to policy.
The poont of the 2nd has been and should always be a check on the power of the state.
Instead of an arms race between civilians and the state how about we scale back the military industrial complex? or the surveillance state? capisci?
And yes, I think the licensing program for full auto actually should be expanded as I'm not sure there's ever been a mass shooting in modern American History that has involved a licensed automatic weapon. If you provide me evidence to the contrary I would be open to altering my opinion.
I don't think of you as a cheap two silver dollar libertarian who only deals in absolutes. But as the oft stated cliché goes, where do you logically draw the line between what firearms we should have the right to own? It's a pretty flimsy position in my view (not saying you are so don't twist) to be for semi-auto AR style rifles, but against fully auto. And furthermore, if people truly believe that guns are the PRIMARY guarantor of liberty, then the citizenry should, in fact, be armed as heavily as possible to provide an adequate check on future tyranny. On a side note - while I think having a 2nd amendment certainly isn't a bad thing - I contend that is not the primary reason we are a free people; rather, this is more so due to the fact that we are country which was founded by brilliant men who were products of the English Enlightenment (that they were protestants played a big role too).
It's pointless to worry about the military industrial complex. It was a necessary evil forced upon us? by external actors. Furthermore, it's probably been more of a net positive to our nation than a negative. Think of all the kewl shit we have today as a result of all that Cold War R&D spending. Surveillance state is a necessary evil as well; if the A-rabs or whomever kill another 3,000 Americans, then we're going to get Patriot Act on steroids. The fact that we haven't had a major domestic terrorist attack in 17 years suggests that there is some ROI.
I mean in my imaginary anarcho-captilist state we could all have F-14's and be flying around like assholes while drunk and watching @Swaye bang hookers.
That's imaginary though so dealing in the real world of complexity, compromises, history, context, and geography?
I'd like to see an expansion of our current automatic weapons licensing program.
A new emphasis on "gun security" i.e. having lockboxes, storing ammo separately, secure locations, etc. Per the research and statistics this more than anything reduces 1)Suicides and 2) Homicides due to domestic violence. Both of which are two of the leaders in gun deaths.
A large tangential topic but mental health solutions/efforts.
A reduction in the militarization of the police and it's surveillance state. I'd add from some of my side voluntary work that "soft" skills training for police officers could go a loooooonnnng way to improving things and reducing the need for violent confrontations between civilians and police.
An armed(and not ill prepared for duty) set of officers at schools with more than a revolver stored securely in their vehicle. I had them in my highschool and it didn't traumatize me.
Idk that's a decent start to the Doog_Bot platform.
I support some of that. I don't think arming people at schools helps for various reasons.
That being said, there is the NRA lobby and a large contingent is the GOP base that thinks any further gun control is robbing them I'd their Constitutional, and apparently God given, right to bear arms. I'm of the belief that the NRA needs to pull it's head out of its ass and work to protect our gun rights by providing meaningful controls that will reduce gun violence.
Ironically, I think Honda, albeit haphazardly, was poonting out that firearms deaths are actually at historically low levels. They are.
The statistical odds on kids getting shot in a school shooting are still essentially meaningless statistically(don't twist). i.e. Basically 0.
It's purely the news cycle and the optics around it that make it the cause of the day.
It was not haphazard. I was making a point that gun violence was down and it coincided with the beginning of football at Oregon. (Also something with a Brady bill but I'm sure that's just coincidence).
That being said, see my other post about gun control.
This is the future if you don't vote. Socialists will eventually seize your guns. They have zero respect for the 2nd amendment. Putting cops in this position is unforgivable. Whoever is in charge of that state should be fucking arrested for violating the constitution.
See below OBK. It doesn't matter if the Reds respect it or not. 26% or more of the states in this country aren't abandoning the 2nd amendment.
The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.
The intention of the "anti-gun" people has never been to repeal the 2nd for the obvious reasons you state. It's too damn difficult and it's against popular opinion.
Instead, it's always been to attempt to re-frame the conversation and pass laws such as the "assault weapons ban" to make owning a firearm legally an extremely difficult task. Always in the name of public safety.
If I can only buy firearms licensed and regulated by the state it kind of defeats the point of them being a check and balance on the state's power.
argumentum ad absurdum: The 2nd amendment isn't repealed but "common sense" laws are passed that only guns produced by Racebannon can be legally sold and kept. Oh what's that you say? Race doesn't produce any guns? Tough shit, it's the law.
If you don't think federal regulators would ever make such nonsense laws then you've never dealt with a federal regulator.
Agree. Let's get rid of ALL nonsensical regulations of our right to own whatever ever firearms we want.
See there you go again Yella with a binary argument as though I'm some cheap Two silver dollar libertarian. You should know me better than that. I don't deal in absolutes when it comes to policy.
The poont of the 2nd has been and should always be a check on the power of the state.
Instead of an arms race between civilians and the state how about we scale back the military industrial complex? or the surveillance state? capisci?
And yes, I think the licensing program for full auto actually should be expanded as I'm not sure there's ever been a mass shooting in modern American History that has involved a licensed automatic weapon. If you provide me evidence to the contrary I would be open to altering my opinion.
I don't think of you as a cheap two silver dollar libertarian who only deals in absolutes. But as the oft stated cliché goes, where do you logically draw the line between what firearms we should have the right to own? It's a pretty flimsy position in my view (not saying you are so don't twist) to be for semi-auto AR style rifles, but against fully auto. And furthermore, if people truly believe that guns are the PRIMARY guarantor of liberty, then the citizenry should, in fact, be armed as heavily as possible to provide an adequate check on future tyranny. On a side note - while I think having a 2nd amendment certainly isn't a bad thing - I contend that is not the primary reason we are a free people; rather, this is more so due to the fact that we are country which was founded by brilliant men who were products of the English Enlightenment (that they were protestants played a big role too).
It's pointless to worry about the military industrial complex. It was a necessary evil forced upon us? by external actors. Furthermore, it's probably been more of a net positive to our nation than a negative. Think of all the kewl shit we have today as a result of all that Cold War R&D spending. Surveillance state is a necessary evil as well; if the A-rabs or whomever kill another 3,000 Americans, then we're going to get Patriot Act on steroids. The fact that we haven't had a major domestic terrorist attack in 17 years suggests that there is some ROI.
Disagree.
We had guns. Problem is we were a bunch of losers still. If we had established a winning kultur by then Canada would be ours? and Worshington wouldn't have been torched.
Canada AND Baja California damn it!
We could have had all of Mexico and Canada, damn it.
I've lived there. Trust me, WDWHA.
Me too, back when it was called California.
Doog bot true?
Why did you move from California (aka mexico lol1!11). To a southern state? That should an interesting story.
This is the future if you don't vote. Socialists will eventually seize your guns. They have zero respect for the 2nd amendment. Putting cops in this position is unforgivable. Whoever is in charge of that state should be fucking arrested for violating the constitution.
See below OBK. It doesn't matter if the Reds respect it or not. 26% or more of the states in this country aren't abandoning the 2nd amendment.
The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.
Time to arrest people who violate the Constitution, including everyone involved in the creation of anti-constitutional state 'laws' that violate the 2nd amendment and allow gun seizure for spurious reasons. Time to arrest presidents of universities that don't honor the 1st amendment. Time to arrest sanctuary city mayors and governors of 'sanctuary states.' Time to put the ring sting on these bitches once and for all.
Fucking Christ, you sound just like the same Reds and Nazi revolutionaries you abhor. We don't just start arresting enemies of the state constitution on America, unless its some sort of national emergency- e.g., Lincoln and habeas corpus, Roosevelt and Japanese, etc. I AM FOR RULE OF LAW.
The 1st and 2nd amendments are under attack in this country and its not a national emergency. Sure.gif. The Constitution IS THE LAW. Unlawful seizure of guns is forbidden. Making so called laws that violate the 2nd amendment is illegal. Those that do so should be arrested for acts that violate the constitution, not their opposition to the constitution. HTH.
Also, presidents of universities that violate the 1st amendment in their policies should also be arrested for acts that violate the Constitution and removed from their posts. For this reason:
That the First Amendment applies on the public university campus is settled law. Public universities have long occupied a special niche in the Supreme Court’s First Amendment jurisprudence. Indeed, the Court has held that First Amendment protections on campus are necessary for the preservation of our democracy
Drunk drivers get arrested. Burglars get arrested. Sanctuary city mayors and sanctuary state governors are FLOUTING immigration law, and should also be arrested. I don't understand how you can claim to be for the rule of law and not see the validity of these positions.
Exactly how are the 1st and 2nd Amendments losing ground? Guns sales have never been higher. People can get more and better guns in America than their fathers could ever have dreamed of. If you don't want to bake a cake for some feeg's wedding you don't have to. Trump is about to get another conservative justice on the court. Nothing to see here. Carry on.
Actually, gun sales have been slipping since the gun grabber left office. Ammo has gotten a lot cheaper and more plentiful too.
That's what happens when the NRA can't create hysteria with full control of Congress.
Do you really live in Montana?
I did for 12 years. Spokompton now. But yes. Fake hysteria is great for gun manufacturers.
I think you actually need to take a stroll in Compton.
This is the future if you don't vote. Socialists will eventually seize your guns. They have zero respect for the 2nd amendment. Putting cops in this position is unforgivable. Whoever is in charge of that state should be fucking arrested for violating the constitution.
See below OBK. It doesn't matter if the Reds respect it or not. 26% or more of the states in this country aren't abandoning the 2nd amendment.
The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.
The intention of the "anti-gun" people has never been to repeal the 2nd for the obvious reasons you state. It's too damn difficult and it's against popular opinion.
Instead, it's always been to attempt to re-frame the conversation and pass laws such as the "assault weapons ban" to make owning a firearm legally an extremely difficult task. Always in the name of public safety.
If I can only buy firearms licensed and regulated by the state it kind of defeats the point of them being a check and balance on the state's power.
argumentum ad absurdum: The 2nd amendment isn't repealed but "common sense" laws are passed that only guns produced by Racebannon can be legally sold and kept. Oh what's that you say? Race doesn't produce any guns? Tough shit, it's the law.
If you don't think federal regulators would ever make such nonsense laws then you've never dealt with a federal regulator.
Agree. Let's get rid of ALL nonsensical regulations of our right to own whatever ever firearms we want.
See there you go again Yella with a binary argument as though I'm some cheap Two silver dollar libertarian. You should know me better than that. I don't deal in absolutes when it comes to policy.
The poont of the 2nd has been and should always be a check on the power of the state.
Instead of an arms race between civilians and the state how about we scale back the military industrial complex? or the surveillance state? capisci?
And yes, I think the licensing program for full auto actually should be expanded as I'm not sure there's ever been a mass shooting in modern American History that has involved a licensed automatic weapon. If you provide me evidence to the contrary I would be open to altering my opinion.
I don't think of you as a cheap two silver dollar libertarian who only deals in absolutes. But as the oft stated cliché goes, where do you logically draw the line between what firearms we should have the right to own? It's a pretty flimsy position in my view (not saying you are so don't twist) to be for semi-auto AR style rifles, but against fully auto. And furthermore, if people truly believe that guns are the PRIMARY guarantor of liberty, then the citizenry should, in fact, be armed as heavily as possible to provide an adequate check on future tyranny. On a side note - while I think having a 2nd amendment certainly isn't a bad thing - I contend that is not the primary reason we are a free people; rather, this is more so due to the fact that we are country which was founded by brilliant men who were products of the English Enlightenment (that they were protestants played a big role too).
It's pointless to worry about the military industrial complex. It was a necessary evil forced upon us? by external actors. Furthermore, it's probably been more of a net positive to our nation than a negative. Think of all the kewl shit we have today as a result of all that Cold War R&D spending. Surveillance state is a necessary evil as well; if the A-rabs or whomever kill another 3,000 Americans, then we're going to get Patriot Act on steroids. The fact that we haven't had a major domestic terrorist attack in 17 years suggests that there is some ROI.
That we've killed a bazillion of 'em "over there" and the Jihadi's flooded in to fight the great satan America and all got waxed has probably helped to a greater extent than the Patriot Act.
Comments
That's imaginary though so dealing in the real world of complexity, compromises, history, context, and geography?
- I'd like to see an expansion of our current automatic weapons licensing program.
- A new emphasis on "gun security" i.e. having lockboxes, storing ammo separately, secure locations, etc. Per the research and statistics this more than anything reduces 1)Suicides and 2) Homicides due to domestic violence. Both of which are two of the leaders in gun deaths.
- A large tangential topic but mental health solutions/efforts.
- A reduction in the militarization of the police and it's surveillance state. I'd add from some of my side voluntary work that "soft" skills training for police officers could go a loooooonnnng way to improving things and reducing the need for violent confrontations between civilians and police.
- An armed(and not ill prepared for duty) set of officers at schools with more than a revolver stored securely in their vehicle. I had them in my highschool and it didn't traumatize me.
Idk that's a decent start to the Doog_Bot platform.Make the pows build a wall.
Then send them back over the wall!
MAGTE!
That being said, there is the NRA lobby and a large contingent is the GOP base that thinks any further gun control is robbing them I'd their Constitutional, and apparently God given, right to bear arms. I'm of the belief that the NRA needs to pull it's head out of its ass and work to protect our gun rights by providing meaningful controls that will reduce gun violence.
That being said, see my other post about gun control.
Why did you move from California (aka mexico lol1!11). To a southern state? That should an interesting story.
However it's a different era and now we must cut out the cancer.