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.
So what your posting of an entire bill is saying is this:
1. A Congressman has some desire to ban handguns (not all guns).
2. There have been efforts to ban assault weapons.
3. There is regulation of gun usage to protect general welfare.
Conclusion: Your entire point - that liberals in Congress want to take your guns away - is proven wrong by the very "evidence" you posted. Even most Republicans agree with restrictions on which guns are allowed and regulations on how they are used.
The "well regulated" part of the Second Amendment proves that regulation is legal under U.S. law.
Certain gun advocates, fearful through propaganda, are reading far more into language and legislation than is actually said and written.
Read objectively what you posted and you will see that no one is trying to take your guns away.
The FACT is that radio does reach Democratic neighborhoods.
The FACT is not everyone who LIVES in a predominantly Democratic area IS a Democrat.
The FACT is, until you except the premise that the left's stance against the wars were responsible for last weeks riots in Europe, you cannot claim that talk radio was responsible for this tragedy.
So what your posting of an entire bill is saying is this:
1. A Congressman has some desire to ban handguns (not all guns).
2. There have been efforts to ban assault weapons.
3. There is regulation of gun usage to protect general welfare.
Conclusion: Your entire point - that liberals in Congress want to take your guns away - is proven wrong by the very "evidence" you posted. Even most Republicans agree with restrictions on which guns are allowed and regulations on how they are used.
The "well regulated" part of the Second Amendment proves that regulation is legal under U.S. law.
Certain gun advocates, fearful through propaganda, are reading far more into language and legislation than is actually said and written.
Read objectively what you posted and you will see that no one is trying to take your guns away.
Seems like someone failed HIST101.
100+ years ago, "regulated" meant equipped.
If it really meant to regulate firearms, wouldn't that contradict the 4 last words of the clause "shall not be infringed"?
Your ignorance in the US Constitution is palpable.
The FACT is, until you except the premise that the left's stance against the wars were responsible for last weeks riots in Europe, you cannot claim that talk radio was responsible for this tragedy. (??????) WHA....????)
A statement cannot be both true and false.
Oh, yes it can....depending on context, who spins it, how it's is spun.
The truth of one statement has nothing to do with the truth (or lie) of the other...
If it really meant to regulate firearms, wouldn't that contradict the 4 last words of the clause "shall not be infringed"?
Your ignorance in the US Constitution is palpable.
Have the decency and respect of other human beings to engage in a conversation, not label people "ignorant".
If you move on to HIST401, you'll find a consistent ruling and support of regulating firearms throughout our history (including the founders, though the agrarian base of their entire culture made them completely incapable of planning for the urban world we live in). The most recent SCOTUS ruling is a prime example.
You can't honestly expect us to live in a society without any regulations on guns. If you do, then you must live in a very rural area where people actually use guns respectably and lawfully.
For those of us living in cities where drunken brawls break out at 3 in the morning and innocent people get gunned down in senseless shootings (like the 2 this week), we have seen how untrustworthy people can be with guns and know that they cannot be trusted without laws.
Anyway - you're harping on one minor point and missing the larger point of my response to ILOONTZ's incorrect assessment of federal intentions.
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.
That part of Pittsburgh is VERY DEMOCRATIC, liberal.. Not even close to republican or conservative. Its been run by Democrats for 100 years... 
