Why I think they can never take our guns

[flywise]

you are assuming I agree with those laws when in fact they are EXACTLY why there should be absolutely no more slipping down that rabbit hole.

I was not assuming, only asking the question.
By your answer you do agree they are infringements.
Every constitutional right has infringements in one form or another.

[Mike D]

I was not assuming, only asking the question.

By your answer you do agree they are infringements.

Every constitutional right has infringements in one form or another.

I think what he’s saying is we have given enough.

No more.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Ironman]

what in my post leads you to your conclusion that I think we should compromise on our Constitutional rights.

Is the 2nd Amendment a Constitutional Right?

If your answer is YES,- then, yes, you have mentioned compromise in every single thread that has anything to do with the subject of gun control.

If your answer is YES, BUT-then we have nothing left to talk about.

[ttechdallas]

Is the 2nd Amendment a Constitutional Right?

If your answer is YES,- then, yes, you have mentioned compromise in every single thread that has anything to do with the subject of gun control.

If your answer is YES, BUT-then we have nothing left to talk about.

That argument is so irrational as to be scary. By that argument, our Constitutional rights are compromised, therefore violated if you can't:

• walk thru an airport and board an airplane while carrying a firearm
• own a machine gun, bazooka, or who knows what else
• purchase a firearm because you are felon or insane
• strap an AR-15 on your back, your son's and daughter's backs and walk into an NFL stadium and watch at football game

Now of course these examples are all absurd, but that is basically the argument you are making when you can't or won't articulate what is included in our 2nd Amendment rights. Why is it so hard for you see this and the danger it represents when we won't compromise on anything?

Since systemnt is so smart, maybe he could put that intelligence to use and define all the acceptable gun regulations once and for all instead of just calling people stupid. As obvious as it seems to him, it shouldn't be that hard.

[Draco]

Where are all the limitations on the first amendment? Why is lying OK for news papers? Start talking about qualifications on the first and see how many liberals get upset.

No other amendment has as many laws governing it's use as the second amendment. There is no reason for any more laws against it. There are already laws against what the gun will be used for. Why any more laws against the guns them selves?

[PondPopper]

Where are all the limitations on the first amendment? Why is lying OK for news papers? Start talking about qualifications on the first and see how many liberals get upset.

No other amendment has as many laws governing it's use as the second amendment. There is no reason for any more laws against it. There are already laws against what the gun will be used for. Why any more laws against the guns them selves?

Why more laws against guns?? That's simple.. Because its all about total control.. It is much more difficult for "them" to accomplish total control over a heavily armed society...

This has never been about saving lives... NEVER.

If saving lives was "their" main goal that "they" wish to accomplish gun control would not even make the top 10..

[Clay C]

Is the 2nd Amendment a Constitutional Right?

If your answer is YES,- then, yes, you have mentioned compromise in every single thread that has anything to do with the subject of gun control.

If your answer is YES, BUT-then we have nothing left to talk about.

It's even more steadfast because it isn't a Constitutional right. It is a natural right we are born with given by a higher power than the government. The Constitution recognizes and guarantees government shall not mess with it.

The government cannot take away rights it does not give. The fact that we are having the conversation in the first place shows how far our Republic has fallen.

[Clay C]

Where are all the limitations on the first amendment? Why is lying OK for news papers? Start talking about qualifications on the first and see how many liberals get upset.

No other amendment has as many laws governing it's use as the second amendment. There is no reason for any more laws against it. There are already laws against what the gun will be used for. Why any more laws against the guns them selves?

Speech led to more death in the 20 century than anything else.

[dmk]

I don't know, if the wrong people get in power, I could see them trying to bring in the UN to assist w/ "peace keeping"....

[systemnt]

I don't know, if the wrong people get in power, I could see them trying to bring in the UN to assist w/ "peace keeping"....

hahahahahahahahah hahaha hah cough hahahahahaha HAHAHAHAHAhahaha wait.. you were serious?

[dmk]

hahahahahahahahah hahaha hah cough hahahahahaha HAHAHAHAHAhahaha wait.. you were serious?

I've heard of crazier things, selling out the country, access to government offices, etc. People have lost it lately.

[miket]

It's even more steadfast because it isn't a Constitutional right. It is a natural right we are born with given by a higher power than the government. The Constitution recognizes and guarantees government shall not mess with it.

The government cannot take away rights it does not give. The fact that we are having the conversation in the first place shows how far our Republic has fallen.

Amen! Precisely!

[Ætheling]

I don't know, if the wrong people get in power, I could see them trying to bring in the UN to assist w/ "peace keeping"....

Thank you Jesus for providing us with blue helmeted foreigners to kill.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk