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 why haven't you? Now may be the time to explain (something I asked in the very first response).
Because I'm not interesting in being quizzed by you. I understand that the first part exists, (I believe most do) and I understand that it provides a rationale for the final part.. I also understand and am aware of different takes on each part. Broadly, the amendment was designed as a check on the power of the federal government and it's forces by protecting the ability of citizens to resist. If you have something specific you wish to state as a point, please do so.
Because I'm not interesting in being quizzed by you. I understand that the first part exists, (I believe most do) and I understand that it provides a rationale for the final part also understand and am aware of different takes on each part. Broadly, the amendment was designed as a check on the power of the federal government and it's forces by protecting the ability of citizens to resist. If you have something specific you wish to state as a point, please do so.
And that, after all this run around. I know, I can be difficult. But y'all make it way too easy.
Perhaps you need a history lesson. The party that started wars against communism which cost about 95K American lives was:
A. Democrat
B. Republican
A two option multiple choice question may or may not be too difficult for you. There's always google though just in case.......
Considering the first American "advisors" were sent in in the 1950s, and the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution passed the House 416-0 and 88-2 in the Senate, I'm gonna have to go with "C" (ie All of the Above), at least as far as Vietnam is concerned.
First of all, Obama has not even said one thing about taking guns away the whole time he has been in office. second of all, if anyone tried to take all guns away, it goes against the 2nd amendment and would be taken to court and third, I do not know anyone that wants all guns taken away. if anything, we just want gun law reform meaning things like backround checks when buying a gun or taking fingerprints or something, NOT taking all guns away.
First of all, though I don't own a gun, I'm pretty conservative. Well... I guess I do own a pellet gun so I can shoot rabbits in my garden.
Anyway, I don't feel the need to own a gun, but I am strongly convinced that law-abiding citizens should be allowed to own guns if they so choose - and go through the proper channels. The reason? Criminals will always own guns, whether legal or not.
It's not the law-abiding, gun-owning citizens that are EVER the problem.
Beyond that, I do not know why there was such a run on guns & ammo when Obama was elected. And if he's re-elected, there will be an even BIGGER run on guns & ammo. Go figure.
why are conservatives so afraid that they are going to have their guns taken away?
I doubt that it's conservatives.
I suspect that it's mostly right wing nut jobs; RWNJs. They're afraid of everything and everyone. They're surrounded my enemies constantly and only they are upholding America's liberty and freedom while the rest of us are trying to strip it all away.
First of all, though I don't own a gun, I'm pretty conservative. Well... I guess I do own a pellet gun so I can shoot rabbits in my garden.
Anyway, I don't feel the need to own a gun, but I am strongly convinced that law-abiding citizens should be allowed to own guns if they so choose - and go through the proper channels. The reason? Criminals will always own guns, whether legal or not.
It's not the law-abiding, gun-owning citizens that are EVER the problem.
Beyond that, I do not know why there was such a run on guns & ammo when Obama was elected. And if he's re-elected, there will be an even BIGGER run on guns & ammo. Go figure.
Good post.
To address the last para, its about a business opportunity. Frighten people... reap profits. I understand you're a conservative and consequently may not be into watching or keeping up with likes of Jon Stewart like I do. But a piece like this is worth watching to have clues to those whys.
Really? If you didn't see it already, you're not going to see it again. We have that settled.
Oh yeah, I nearly forgot it - people don't quote the whole amendment each time they discuss the "right to bear arms." I was right that it wasn't really worth trying to guess.
Oh yeah, I nearly forgot it - people don't quote the whole amendment each time they discuss the "right to bear arms." I was right that it wasn't really worth trying to guess.
And I was right that y'all are better served picking the "right" pieces. Anything more is just inconvenience.
We now have that settled as well.
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.
why are conservatives so afraid that they are going to have their guns taken away?
