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.
We should repeal the 2nd, and Dems are at this very moment trying to repeal at least portions of the 1st amendment. So basically the OP is saying "we should destroy the constitution!"
Without the 1st and 2nd, the rest is just kindling.
I love how a conservative is right if the view fits your meme. In this case, he is not right, and even less so now.
Why would I suffer because 200,000 guns are stolen every year and end up in hands of criminals? Why would Anybody have to suffer when some idiot with a gun walks into a child care, school or a courthouse and opens fire on random people...
Not for long, bud. Not for long.
And yes, we are a democracy: we chose our government through democratic elections.
No we aren't, but thanks for showing how poorly you did in school. We are a constitutional republic, not a democracy. If we were a democracy states that ban gay marriage wouldn't have their laws overturned on constitutional basis or any other law that the people voted on and passed but are eventually overturned. You don't get to pick and choose which parts of the constitution you want to follow.
At one time I thought this statement made a lot of sense. I mean, one guy with an AR-15 isn't going to stand up to tanks, fighter jets, and drones. In fact, it seemed like even hundreds or thousands of guys with small-arms would be no match for the US military.
Then came 9/11, and especially "Afghanistan". Afghanistan is a war which at least at one time had almost universal international support. Yet, it is the longest war in US history, it is going on 13 years now. A 5-year old at the start of the conflict would now be an 18-year old man. And the war doesn't really seem to be coming to an end. Americans will withdraw this year, but the Taliban is far from beaten.
And these guys don't have tanks and planes and drones and nuclear bombs. They are just guys with small arms and improvised explosive devices.
If the US government had to fight a real insurgency in America. I think it would be far more difficult than many might believe. And even more, unlike in Afghanistan where the US government can kill hundreds or thousands. And where militants blow up buildings and kill civilians without much concern from Americans since those things are only happening to non-Americans(we only focus on troops deaths).
I promise you, if Americans started being killed in large numbers. Whether they are the "crazy gun-nuts" or not. The country would fall apart.
The recent happenings on the Cliven Bundy ranch in Nevada shows how the government doesn't want to fight American militants even in America, and even when they are breaking the law.
If hypothetically the protesters in Nevada hadn't had guns, do you think the US government would have backed down? Not a chance.
The US government is terrified of Americans with small-arms. Don't be fooled into thinking otherwise.
well said my friend, i had to rep you for this post.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheMoreYouKnow
People who try diverting to racism when they lose an argument make me sick.
George Will was wrong on the Second Amendment. If the OP thinks that George Will being for gun control 25 years ago will persuade any pro-gun person to switch their position to favor gun control, he seriously overestimates Will's influence.
Besides, let's take up Chuck Schumer's advice and amend the Constitution. How about this for repealing and replacing the Second Amendment?
Quote:
Originally Posted by 28th Amendment
The second article of amendment to the Constitution of the United States is hereby repealed. Every person shall have the absolute legal right to own, possess, carry, and brandish any weapon anywhere. The right may not be denied, abridged, or impaired by the United States, the several states, or any other government.
That's right gunlover...got to keep those unruly black folks in their place. Some of you guys make me sick.
That's quite amusing, since gun control laws were a component of Jim Crow designed to keep those unruly black folks in their place. After all, it's much easier to control a population when they are unarmed than when they are armed. That's why slaves were prohibited from carrying firearms.
That's right gunlover...got to keep those unruly black folks in their place. Some of you guys make me sick.
I dont care what your skin color is, you have no right to burn down blocks of houses and business because you dont like the outcome of a trial..
I dont care who you are, if you try to throw a burning bottle of gasoline at my house, business or that of my friends, family, or community I will put one in you..I give a negative damn about your skin color, you a criminal, a arsonist, and a person who has attempted to burn innocent people alive based on a emotional response to the outcome a trail....
But yeah I must a "racist", right? (Sarcasm)
I guess if they were trying to kill you, I guess you as the "non racist" you are would let them just to prove how "non-racist" you are..
Every democracy on the planet allows citizens to protect themselves.
No they don't.
What about the People Republic of China?
What about the Peoples Republic of North Korea?
What about the People Republic of Cuba?
What about the People Republic of Laos?
And most of the other nations dont restrict the right of the Government to deny you the right to use the best possible tools to do so.
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.