Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
View Poll Results: Would the Democratic party embracing gun rights strike a blow to the GOP
Yes - this would help the Democratic party 9 33.33%
No 18 66.67%
Multiple Choice Poll. Voters: 27. You may not vote on this poll

Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 08-03-2012, 06:45 PM
 
Location: Old Mother Idaho
29,218 posts, read 22,361,490 times
Reputation: 23858

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Savoir Faire View Post
Embracing gun rights in my opinion = supporting conceal and carry
I agree. This is the last issue the gun rights have to argue, so it has become a big one.
Here in very conservative Idaho, where owning a gun is as common as owning a pair of shoes, the issue was brought up in the Legislature, and was voted down by a Republican super-majority. We already have tolerance for open carry, but they decided concealed carry was simply too dangerous to make it any easier to get a permit than it already is here.

A similar bill was also defeated that would have allowed open and concealed carry on our college campuses. The students, faculties, administrators, all did not want either allowed on campuses, and the bill sank like a rock.

We have our share of yearly hunting deaths, accidental shootings, intentional shootings, and similar gun mayhem going on, and have always had. I think that I'm safe in saying every 4th home in a neighborhood has at least one gun in it, and almost as often, 2 or more. We know what can happen.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-03-2012, 06:46 PM
 
Location: somewhere in the woods
16,880 posts, read 15,196,989 times
Reputation: 5240
Quote:
Originally Posted by mohawkx View Post
That is no more a probability than banning all firearms in the country is a probability. Neither one will ever, ever happen. You and the goofballs who want to take every gun away from every citizen and sing Kumbaya together need to sit down and hammer out something in the middle.


wont happen, of course if I was elected potus I would fix it where no more borrowing would ever happen again at the national level, and the debt would disappear overnight. also, the full faith and credit clause would go into complete effect as well within the several states.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-03-2012, 06:47 PM
 
Location: Metro Detroit, Michigan
29,823 posts, read 24,902,718 times
Reputation: 28520
Ha... NO! The gun loving right is just that... Right.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-03-2012, 06:52 PM
 
6,734 posts, read 9,340,799 times
Reputation: 1857
Quote:
Originally Posted by monkeywrenching View Post
no firearms law at all in either state/local or at the federal level. any free citizen can own and use any firearm they want to. if you dont want a criminal to have a firearm, then keep them in jail.
Would a person be allowed to conceal and carry any type of firearm?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-03-2012, 06:54 PM
 
Location: somewhere in the woods
16,880 posts, read 15,196,989 times
Reputation: 5240
Quote:
Originally Posted by ozzie679 View Post
Would a person be allowed to conceal and carry any type of firearm?


yes, without permits too. the criminals already carry anything they want, without any regard to current laws, why should we treat the already law abiding any different.


look at current firearms laws. now remember that criminals already break gun laws. that means that gun laws are only there to control the law abiding citizen, as criminals dont give a damn about the law anyways.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-03-2012, 06:57 PM
 
6,734 posts, read 9,340,799 times
Reputation: 1857
Quote:
Originally Posted by monkeywrenching View Post
yes, without permits too. the crminals already carry anything they want, without any regard to current laws, why should we treat the already law abiding any different.
I've never considered that line of thinking.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-03-2012, 06:58 PM
 
Location: somewhere in the woods
16,880 posts, read 15,196,989 times
Reputation: 5240
Quote:
Originally Posted by ozzie679 View Post
I've never considered that line of thinking.

maybe more people should.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-03-2012, 06:58 PM
 
2,603 posts, read 5,021,268 times
Reputation: 1959
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wapasha View Post
There is no more Democratic Party, it's been replaced with a pseudo-Marxist party, where the political elites are allowed to operate outside the law, live like pampered royalty, and rule over the huddled masses.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA. Excellent parody of delusional paranoia.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-03-2012, 07:18 PM
 
Location: Old Bellevue, WA
18,782 posts, read 17,358,834 times
Reputation: 7990
Quote:
Originally Posted by Savoir Faire View Post
I often wondered about this.

It's like asking if the Jehovah's Witnesses were to embrace the concept of the Trinity, would Evangelicals flock to their churches. Well maybe so, but a) it's not going to happen, and b) if it did it would mean that the JH's had converted, not the reverse.

Leftist collectivism is never going to fully embrace the idea of arms in the hands of individuals. They only trust the collective with this power. Look around the world--there are very few left of center democracies that have not severely curtailed gun rights. The US, Switzerland, and Israel are about the only exceptions that I know of.

The NRA is sitting pretty right now, but only 20 years ago it looked like gun banners were gaining the upper hand and perhaps on a track to ban all semi-autos. The current situation could just be a short-lived anomaly, like alcohol prohbition was. It's entirely possible that in another generation the pendulum will swing back and we'll follow the examples of Europe, Canada, and Australia. Gun banning is entirely consistent with collectivism, and if we go the collectivist route, undoubtedly we will eventually also go the gun-ban route.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-03-2012, 07:30 PM
 
Location: somewhere in the woods
16,880 posts, read 15,196,989 times
Reputation: 5240
Quote:
Originally Posted by wutitiz View Post
It's like asking if the Jehovah's Witnesses were to embrace the concept of the Trinity, would Evangelicals flock to their churches. Well maybe so, but a) it's not going to happen, and b) if it did it would mean that the JH's had converted, not the reverse.

Leftist collectivism is never going to fully embrace the idea of arms in the hands of individuals. They only trust the collective with this power. Look around the world--there are very few left of center democracies that have not severely curtailed gun rights. The US, Switzerland, and Israel are about the only exceptions that I know of.

The NRA is sitting pretty right now, but only 20 years ago it looked like gun banners were gaining the upper hand and perhaps on a track to ban all semi-autos. The current situation could just be a short-lived anomaly, like alcohol prohbition was. It's entirely possible that in another generation the pendulum will swing back and we'll follow the examples of Europe, Canada, and Australia. Gun banning is entirely consistent with collectivism, and if we go the collectivist route, undoubtedly we will eventually also go the gun-ban route.

I dont think that will happen. read some of the entrance to statehood compacts that were done between a state and the feds.

the compact that Montana has stated that firearms is an individual right, not a collective right.

Quote:
President Benjamin Harrison approved the Montana Constitution in 1889, which secured the right of "any person" to bear arms, clearly intended as an individual right and an individual right deemed consistent then with the Second Amendment by the parties to the contract;
Montana: Wrong Heller Decision Would Violate Its Compact with the United States - Hit & Run : Reason.com
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:47 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top