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.
No one is doing anything with the Constitution is 100% correct. No one in DC is even reading it.
The Bill of Rights are INDIVIDUAL rights. The 2nd Amendment goes the extra step and adds "shall not be infringed".
If this were a discussion of the federal government wanting to regulate alcohol then they had that power for a couple of years. They went through the process as defined in the Constitution and received the power from the states. Then in a dramatic turn of events for a government, they admitted they made a mistake and went through the process as defined in the Constitution to repeal the Amendment.
We can argue if the states have the right to pass gun laws if the Constitution is not incorporated and the state's Constitution or other primary document doesn't forbid it. A LOT of them have a similar statement similar to the 2nd Amendment. Here's mine:
SECTION 12.
The right of every citizen to keep and bear arms in defense of his home, person, or property, or in aid of the civil power when thereto legally summoned, shall not be called in question, but the legislature may regulate or forbid carrying concealed weapons.
How many gun restrictions do we already have? That's what I thought. Shall not be infringed . . . not a good argument.
Not every measure will resolve every risk 100% every time.
.
Give me some examples of what deaths it would have prevented......anything close to the justification for all it would entail plus the expenditure of $100,000,000 a year.
Ridiculously self-gratifying nonsense. How inane is it to insist that the only honest answer is the one that strokes you.
Well, that was honest, but not the right answer.
How about explain to me and everyone else, how anything in that bill would have prevented the Newtown shooting. Go ahead, I'll let you pick anything in that bill and then provide an answer.
Then while your at it, please tell me how the CURRENT law did not work when lanza was turned down at the local gun stores....
Give me some examples of what deaths it would have prevented......anything close to the justification for all it would entail plus the expenditure of $100,000,000 a year.
Right after you promise, in some manner that I could trust the promise, that if I present an example that you will accept it, apologize, repudiate your previous comments, and not use my message as yet another lame excuse to just restate your antisocial perspective.
Either you have an example or you do not. Setting forth a list of demands that must be met before you're willing to share your information is not very constructive.
Either way it is of little consequence, because the hypothetical or real fact that person X killed someone with a gun purchased in a private transaction (thus no NICS check) is not the same as proof that a background check requirement would have prevented the killing from taking place altogether. Life is rarely that simple.
Right after you promise, in some manner that I could trust the promise, that if I present an example that you will accept it, apologize, repudiate your previous comments, and not use my message as yet another lame excuse to just restate your antisocial perspective.
I didn't think so.
Well, if you answer my entire question....not just give one example out of the approximate 11,000 homicides per year....Ill retract my position.
But, since you include " in some manner that I could trust the promise" I suppose you can weasel out using that alone.
Whadda ya' want....a signed and notorized statement with a financial penalty?
Norgy touched on the point: Life is rarely as simple as your question implied. Also, you have no reason to admit the possibility of linkages that effectively discredit your own comments, so pandering to such inquiries is pointless.
Norgy touched on the point: Life is rarely as simple as your question implied. Also, you have no reason to admit the possibility of linkages that effectively discredit your own comments, so pandering to such inquiries is pointless.
In other words, you have nothing.
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.
