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.
Look - restrictions can be placed on the second amendment. That's just the way it is.
TRANSLATION: I'm ignoring all the arguments made to the contrary, all the advice of the Framers, and the complete lack of any such permission for restrictions in the Constitution. And I'm simply declaring that I'm right and they are all wrong, even though I can't provide any evidence at all. So there.
1) Who exactly is "coming for your guns"? That has never happened. It never will happen. We just live in a nation where someone who wants to kill a lot of people at once has the easiest means of doing so.
That we have more or less shrugged off change and accepted that Sandy Hook will occur again and again seems to be a vote for stasis.
Nothing changed even after that nutjob went after Republican politicians playing baseball, I think it was.
2) Why is your identity so inexplicably attached to firearms?
Any corporation is entirely within its rights to ban employees from carrying weapons (as defined completely by said corporation) to work. They can even fire you (no pun intended) for owning guns, and there's nothing you could do about it.
So while you're seemingly stuck in this bizarre mental space where access to guns is your primary concern, did you not notice that you've completely lost that access elsewhere?
If America was invaded by Russia, would you have confidence in an Obama-type liberal to protect you? Think real hard.
Yes. Oh god yes, I would.
Obama ran a very tight ship with his administration. The Trump administration by comparison is a revolving door of hired-then-fired appointees.
To shoot your own question right back at you, if Russia invaded the US, would you have confidence in the Russian-owned president we have now, or the Obama presidency?
Why will no one admit that giving mentally I'll people the right to own weapons in the name of freedom is a dumb idea that is also dangerous?!?!
Why will no one admit that letting people who are too dangerous to own a firearm run loose in society is a dumb idea that is also really dangerous?
Here's a clue......
If someone is too dangerous to own a firearm..... then they're too dangerous to own a knife.... or a baseball bat .....or rent a truck....or fly on a plane....or walk the same streets as our wives and kids.
If you haven't had your rights taken away by due process and of legal age, you should be able to buy a firearm.
What a false sense of security that is, due process or not. That should read, "buy a firearm from a licensed dealer"
The only way you deny anyone their rights, much less their liberties, is to incarcerate them, or kill them.
Everything else is a dream.
It is not illegal until you get caught..... Do you see the logic?
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.
