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.
Why do leftists think they can get away with usurping the right to own a firearm?
Outrageous the Left thinks some bureaucrat can determine if your reason for wanting one is good enough.
These kind of people are truly anathema to what made this country great.
It's really not a *left* thing.
It's because gun violence is a big problem in urban areas which are typically democratic. Now, they can't be honest and telll their constituancy that the problem is there are a lot of drug dealing fatherless scumbags around. They have to blame *guns*...yep the problem is the guns.
This is really where the political polarization over gun control has it's roots.....demographics, not really ideology IMO.
I've met a lot of pro-gun lefties. Most of the anti-gun types are really just urban democrats and oppose guns because they were told too.
It's because gun violence is a big problem in urban areas which are typically democratic. Now, they can't be honest and telll their constituancy that the problem is there are a lot of drug dealing fatherless scumbags around. They have to blame *guns*...yep the problem is the guns.
This is really where the political polarization over gun control has it's roots.....demographics, not really ideology IMO.
I've met a lot of pro-gun lefties. Most of the anti-gun types are really just urban democrats and oppose guns because they were told too.
I know a few Lefties who own SEVERAL guns.
I also think people need to realize criminals do not care about laws. I grew up in a country where there is no such thing as the right to bear arms and it is one of the most violent countries in the world.
It's because gun violence is a big problem in urban areas which are typically democratic. Now, they can't be honest and telll their constituancy that the problem is there are a lot of drug dealing fatherless scumbags around. They have to blame *guns*...yep the problem is the guns.
This is really where the political polarization over gun control has it's roots.....demographics, not really ideology IMO.
I've met a lot of pro-gun lefties. Most of the anti-gun types are really just urban democrats and oppose guns because they were told too.
I disagree. Look at the states, cities that insist on usurping the 2nd Amendment, by whatever means necessary.
I think you'll find its mostly liberal/dem lawmakers doing it.
I know there a good leftists that respect the 2nd amendment too.
If the Government wishes to burden a right guaranteed by the Constitution, it may do so provided that it can show a satisfactory justification and a sufficiently adapted method. The showing, however, is always the Government‘s to make. A citizen may not be required to offer a ―good and substantial reason‖ why he should be permitted to exercise his rights. The right‘s existence is all the reason he needs.
In other words, the government is not allowed to assume the citizen is guilty until the citizens proves to the govt that he is innocent. The gvot is the one that must do the proving, before it can declare that a citizen is not allowed to keep or bear arms.
It's a good first step. Next, we'll need a case where the judge examines whatever reasons the govt uses to deny a law-abiding citizen a permit... and decides that those reasons aren't good enough to take away the citizen's 2nd amendment rights.
In other words, the government is not allowed to assume the citizen is guilty until the citizens proves to the govt that he is innocent. The gvot is the one that must do the proving, before it can declare that a citizen is not allowed to keep or bear arms.
It's a good first step. Next, we'll need a case where the judge examines whatever reasons the govt uses to deny a law-abiding citizen a permit... and decides that those reasons aren't good enough to take away the citizen's 2nd amendment rights.
And then another, etc.
One of the reasons I retired to North Carolina it is a "shall carry" state. Meaning the state says you have a right to carry. When applying for a CC permit it is up to the state to prove you should NOT be given a CC permit. The onus is on them.
I disagree. Look at the states, cities that insist on usurping the 2nd Amendment, by whatever means necessary.
I think you'll find its mostly liberal/dem lawmakers doing it.
I know there a good leftists that respect the 2nd amendment too.
dems and reps are often not liberals and conservatives. Many are just mindlessly dem or rep. For an example you should readily spot....look how about 90% of the anti-war crowd dried up after teh 2008 election.
Ditto for all the faux fiscal conservatives that didn't have a problem with all the bailouts and spending or rationalized it away....until after 2008.
P.S. Almost every democrat from a rural state is pro-gun. Even Daschle was pro-gun until he started grandstanding for a presidential run and then couldn't get re-elected. It really is a more rural vs. urban thing which due to demographics yada yada yada...
dems and reps are often not liberals and conservatives. Many are just mindlessly dem or rep. For an example you should readily spot....look how about 90% of the anti-war crowd dried up after teh 2008 election.
Ditto for all the faux fiscal conservatives that didn't have a problem with all the bailouts and spending or rationalized it away....until after 2008.
P.S. Almost every democrat from a rural state is pro-gun. Even Daschle was pro-gun until he started grandstanding for a presidential run and then couldn't get re-elected. It really is a more rural vs. urban thing which due to demographics yada yada yada...
this is what my experience tells me too. i've lived among urban and rural republicans and urban and rural democrats, and it almost always breaks down along urban-vs-rural lines, rather than party lines.
that's my anecdotal experience, for what it's worth.
One of the reasons I retired to North Carolina it is a "shall carry" state. Meaning the state says you have a right to carry. When applying for a CC permit it is up to the state to prove you should NOT be given a CC permit. The onus is on them.
Maryland is not a "shall carry" state.
Hopefully this judge's ruling will change that.
But govt officials will fight like badgers to prevent the loss of ANY of their power, so I expect the road back to Constitutional freedom and personal responsibility for gun owners, will be long and hard.
Witness what happened in Washington DC after the Supreme Court's Heller decision. The govt there put a "permit" system into place... and then put ridiculous numbers of restrictions, paperwork, fees, and other obstacles in the way of getting a permit. So more lawsuits were filed on grounds that the government was still unconstitutionally restricting people's right to keep and bear arms, and we'll have to go thru the whole dreary mess again.
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.
