Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
That is assuming that the people elected and sent to D.C. actually do represent the will of the people. A good portion of the time, the constituents are electing what they consider to be the lesser of two (or more) evils, in the hopes that somewhere along the line, the elected officials might consider their constituent's welfare from time to time, as opposed to, oh... say... the next election.
The people in Congress have long ago stopped being "of, by and for the people". This is, of course, our fault for being the sheep that we are (as a group). We have allowed the government to usurp powers that should have been left to the states. The Articles of Confederation were too weak for the federal Government. We've allowed them to garner more than they should have under the Constitution. Maybe it's time for something else.
We broke with Britian because we decided we didn't want to be a part of a peerage/nobility system ruling the rest of us peasants. But all we've done is traded one set of nobility for another. Instead of calling them Dukes, Earls, Barons, Etc., we now call them Senators, Congressman, CEO's, etc.
But the most Godawful truth about this whole mess is that "we, the people" allowed it to occur.
Well what he's referring to is no longer applicable since the states no longer elect and send to DC the congress, which means they can't recall them either.
They're now elected by individual votes which basically kills any sort of accountability on their part.
That is assuming that the people elected and sent to D.C. actually do represent the will of the people.
I think they usually do. I also think the will of the people is often frivolous, capricious and stupid but that's the way it goes, with a representative form of government you win some and you lose some.
Evidently some restriction of arms is constitutional. I have the impression that with many it's the guns not the Constitution and the Constitutional argument is merely one of convenience.
As for sawzalls it should be obvious; I use a sawzall rather than a gun to compensate for my inadequacies. Note how quickly and tirelessly a sawzall strokes. It's MUCH better than a gun. I keep my collection of sawzalls in a sawzall safe away from children. The only way you'll take my sawzall is to pry it from my cold, dead hand.
I use a gun to go plinking with my son.
actually I could use another sawzall from you sawzall safe to cut off your dead hand and then I would have 2 sawzalls and a really cool dead hand to show people
That's nice. I used to shoot quite a bit, plinking with a SMLE mostly using cheap Pakistani Army surplus cartridges. I reached the point where I shot well but to shoot better would take more time and money than I wished to spend. So I haven't shot in several years.
I believe in the right of citizens to own guns but also in the right of government to regulate them. SMLEs yes (or perhaps a maybe given it's 10 round magazine and very high rate of fire). AR-15s no. Single shot breechloaders like Rugers, Brownings, Martinis and trapdoor Springfields a definite yes. Also yes on double barreled Express rifles.
I think they usually do. I also think the will of the people is often frivolous, capricious and stupid but that's the way it goes, with a representative form of government you win some and you lose some.
I think they share the politcal leanings of the majority of their constituents, but as for voting in their constituents' behalf is another thing. Almost always - unless the congressman has absolutely no competition for his/her seat - they will vote along the party line, whether it's in their constituents' best interest or not. What do you think the party whip is for?
But as for your comment about the frivolity of the voters, you're spot on. For citizens to be single-platform voters - ie disregarding all other political stands of a politician in favor of just one topic - is an absolute travesty of the voting privilege. To care more about gun-control than health care or education simply because one likes their guns (btw, im a carrier) is a shame. To care more about a polititan's stand on abortion than what s/he can do to for our nation's infrastructure/energy needs is pathetic. To vote for one over another simply because s/he is your type of Protestant depresses me.
The historical crowd takes an interest in M1 carbines, M1 Garands, M1911's, and such. I personally own an AR-15 (HBAR) and an AK-74 variant (Arsenal). I can appreciate the thought that went into the designs, although the HBAR is a bit nose heavy.
That's nice. I used to shoot quite a bit, plinking with a SMLE mostly using cheap Pakistani Army surplus cartridges. I reached the point where I shot well but to shoot better would take more time and money than I wished to spend. So I haven't shot in several years.
I believe in the right of citizens to own guns but also in the right of government to regulate them. SMLEs yes (or perhaps a maybe given it's 10 round magazine and very high rate of fire). AR-15s no. Single shot breechloaders like Rugers, Brownings, Martinis and trapdoor Springfields a definite yes. Also yes on double barreled Express rifles.
I guess this is were we disagree I don't see any problem with semi-auto's (ar-15,etc.) or large cap magizines.
I don't think a person needs a 30 round self-loading rifle in either Arizona or Chicago. Maybe Mars. But if people out in Arizona want to play with such toys that's their affair.
I think lots of people out west just put on a different pose than those in eastern cities and pretend to be far more independent and self sufficient than they really are. People in Chicago may pretend they're in a Jimmy Cagney movie and those in Arizona may pretend they're in a John Wayne movie but both poses are equally nonsensical. We're all tied into the same economic and social system.
In reference to your comment about the 30 round self-loading rifles, that is your opinion....so don't buy one.
I love my rights given to me by the constitution and will buy as many ar15's and as many 30 round, or 100 round magazines as i want.
Fed money is OUR money that we send to them (they steal) through the income tax. Withhold the tax and they can't do squat.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
