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.
Constitutional Republic rights are not given based on position within government. You gun grabbing liberals make me sick when you say "Only cops should have guns' and citizens shouldn't!
Constitutional Republic rights are not given based on position within government. You gun grabbing liberals make me sick when you say "Only cops should have guns' and citizens shouldn't!
What gun grabbing liberals are you foaming at the mouth about? I'm a liberal and I have an arsenal of assault weapons (Yes, Real assault weapons) and sporting rifles that look like assault weapons that would make you drool. I've collected for over 35 years. I have yet to ever meet one liberal who wants to take all your's or anybody's guns all away. At the most, I've met many liberals who want "reasonable restrictions" on firearms as affirmed by the Supreme Court Decision of Heller vs DC.
What constitutes reasonable restrictions is currently being hammered out in various state level judicial venues. All unreasonable restrictions are being challenged by the lawyers of the NRA which is the largest, richest lobbying group in the nation with unlimited funds to fight any and all gun regulation. That includes federal and state regulation.
Can you give me an example of a liberal stating that "only cops should be allowed to have guns in this country"?
Can you give me an example of any federal gun law that has been passed by the Obama Administration that is anti-2nd? I'll answer for you................NONE!.........ZIP!...........NA DA!...........ZERO!.
If you bring up state's gun regs then that's another story. Some states have more restrictions and other states have much looser restrictions but every state in the union has some forms of reasonable restrictions and more than half of them are republican controlled states.
I thought you RW conservatives were all about "State's Rights" and letting state's determine their own policies?
As far as reasonable restrictions are concerned, Reasonable restrictions were implemented before the ink was dry on the 2nd amendment. Property rights and business rights trump gun rights ever since the 2nd was written. That's your first and biggest "reasonable restriction" on gun rights.
A property owner can demand that you disarm yourself before stepping foot on his property. A business owner can post a "no guns allowed" sign at his establishment. This has been the case since the 2nd was written.
You must have missed your morning movement today. You're grumpy and confrontational and You're ranting about a non existent issue that you personally made up.
Constitutional Republic rights are not given based on position within government. You gun grabbing liberals make me sick when you say "Only cops should have guns' and citizens shouldn't!
Only the liberals in your head are saying that.
It's probably best for not everyone with a pulse to own a gun, but as long as you're law-abiding in other respects, who's stopping you?
It turns out that you are the one with the compromised picture of reality. And remember that Pres. Obama was on record as Illinois state senator in favor of a ban on all semi-automatic weapons. Last I checked he is the titular head of the Democratic party and of liberaldom.
It turns out that you are the one with the compromised picture of reality. And remember that Pres. Obama was on record as Illinois state senator in favor of a ban on all semi-automatic weapons. Last I checked he is the titular head of the Democratic party and of liberaldom.
The proportion of radical liberals who have a fantasy of a nation completely free from firearms is equal the the radical right wingers who fervently believe that each citizen should have the right to own a suitcase nuclear bomb. There are always a few fanatical zealots on both sides of the issue. they are anomolies to the question at hand.
The proportion of radical liberals who have a fantasy of a nation completely free from firearms is equal the the radical right wingers who fervently believe that each citizen should have the right to own a suitcase nuclear bomb. There are always a few fanatical zealots on both sides of the issue. they are anomolies to the question at hand.
In 1994 those "few fanatical zealots" were able to form a 50%+1 majority and pass the "assault weapons" ban in the US house, which was also passed by the senate, and signed into law by another of the "few," Pres. Bill Clinton.
Again, you present a distorted portrayal of reality. Pres. Obama was on record as supporting a ban on all semi-autos. VP Biden claims the "assault weapon" ban as his brainchild. Attorney General Eric Holder once said that we need to "brainwash" people into accepting gun bans. Dem Senate heavyweights like Schumer, Feinstein, and Durbin all have long track records of pushing gun control.
How did all of them get into such high positions of power, if it is just a fanatical few in the Democratic party who are anti-gun?
The proportion of radical liberals who have a fantasy of a nation completely free from firearms is equal the the radical right wingers who fervently believe that each citizen should have the right to own a suitcase nuclear bomb. There are always a few fanatical zealots on both sides of the issue. they are anomolies to the question at hand.
I don't know of one right winger that desires to own a nuclear weapon, but I know plenty of left wingers like Feinstein that want them all off the streets. A fanatical zealot is someone who wants to take away and water down a Constitutional Right. And please stop spouting about common sense. Liberals want a national registry and database, and their Messiah in the rose garden pouted when he didn't get his way. Since all of these "common sense" proposed gun laws seem to involve a registry and database..I ask you..where is the common sense in allowing and revealing all firearms via database(except those that the criminals have) to an entity (government), in opposition of a 2nd Amendment which by it's nature was designed to protect people from it's government? That is like playing poker and revealing some of your cards to your opponent(s).
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.
I'll answer for you................NONE!.........ZIP!...........NA DA!...........ZERO!.
