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.
There should be no free speech exceptions except those already in the amendment. I’d be okay with preventing violent criminals from owning guns but that’s the only exception.
Those laws are already on the books. But unless enforced fail miserably.
Federal Form 4473 the form of which Hunter Biden deliberately lied on to illegally purchase a handgun lists all of the conditions to lawfully purchase and possess a firearm. Deliberately lying on that form is a federal crime punishable by 10 years in prison and a $250,000 fine. Do you think that the Honorable AG Merrick Garland will launch an investigation into this, file charges and prosecute? If not then I guess both him and Hunter's old man are okay with drug addicts possessing firearms and people lying on a federal form in order to obtain them?
We already have thousands of laws that address both the criminal and negligent misuse of firearms along with thousands of laws that address every conceivable criminal act that one could possibly imagine. We don't need any more laws, PERIOD. Especially laws that only serve to criminalize one's lawful possessions and activities.
Quote:
"There are only a few laws in history that are universally applicable. One of these is that the ruling classes do not want the peasantry armed. They will do what they can to convince you that to be armed is dangerous. They will attempt to do this while they themselves are surrounded by armed body guards. Idiots will not notice this hypocrisy and sycophants will ignore it. Fools will surrender their arms in the name of "safety". They will insensibly surrender their liberty at the same time. This is how slaves are made."
There's no question about it the Democrat Party does not want the peasantry especially their political adversaries to be able to lawfully bear arms. While at the same time will use the force of an armed government to carry out their agenda.
But the $64,000 question is: What additional laws can be passed that will affectively convince criminals to give up their weapons? Laws that only affect the law abiding are for political retribution only. What better way is there to punish your political enemies then by with the stroke of a pen turn them into de facto felons if they don't surrender what rightfully belongs to them. While simultaneously punishing them for the acts that are committed by others. Which is exactly what the Democrats are up to. In spite of the fact that it not only violates the 2nd Amendment but Ex Post facto statutes that are written into the Constitution as well.
Quote:
Ex post facto is most typically used to refer to a criminal statute that punishes actions retroactively, thereby criminalizing conduct that was legal when originally performed. Two clauses in the United States Constitution prohibit ex post facto laws:
Art 1, § 9
This prohibits Congress from passing any laws which apply ex post facto.
Art. 1 § 10.
This prohibits the states from passing any laws which apply ex post facto.
At a minimum, ex post facto prohibits legislatures from passing laws which retroactively criminalize behavior. ---https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/ex_post_facto
Ex post facto laws retroactively change the rules of evidence in a criminal case, retroactively alter the definition of a crime, retroactively increase the punishment for a criminal act, or punish conduct that was legal when committed. They are prohibited by Article I, Section 10, Clause 1, of the U.S. Constitution. An ex post facto law is considered a hallmark of tyranny because it deprives people of a sense of what behavior will or will not be punished and allows for random punishment at the whim of those in power.
The prohibition of ex post facto laws was an imperative in colonial America. The Framers of the Constitution understood the importance of such a prohibition, considering the historical tendency of government leaders to abuse power. As Alexander Hamilton observed, "[i]t is easy for men … to be zealous advocates for the rights of the citizens when they are invaded by others, and as soon as they have it in their power, to become the invaders themselves." The desire to thwart abuses of power also inspired the Framers of the Constitution to prohibit bills of attainder, which are laws that inflict punishment on named individuals or on easily ascertainable members of a group without the benefit of a trial. Both ex post facto laws and bills of attainder deprive those subject to them of due process of law—that is, of notice and an opportunity to be heard before being deprived of life, liberty, or property.---https://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Ex+Post+Facto+Laws
Last edited by Ex New Yorker; 06-29-2021 at 06:01 PM..
Most of the polarization in our country right now go back to division on these three issues.
That division is artificially created, by people like you.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bawac34618
Religion: The left believes in absolute, two-way separation of church and state. The right believes in one-way separation, in which the government should stay out of the church but that the church can and should have a voice in how society is governed. Which is it?
Your view is quite hypocritical.
Religion is an ideology, too.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bawac34618
Speech: Both sides hold different standards for speech they agree with vs that they don't. There's no way to defend either party on this. That said, are there certain things that are over the line, especially when it comes to speech that could put others in danger? What about hate speech?
What about it?
Let's start small. First, define "hate" objectively in no uncertain terms. Once you do that, we can have a fruitful discussion.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bawac34618
Right to bear arms: The right believes in an absolute right to bear arms no matter the cost to society or human life.
That is patently false, since the right certainly believes convicted felons should be barred from owning, possessing or using firearms.
Your limited understand of all things-constitutional doesn't even allow you to understand that your Constitution has a solution in the 4th, 5th, 6th and 14th Amendments.
Your State governments are just too incompetent to take advantage of it, but even so, it does not require intervention by the federal government.
You seem to be oblivious to the evolution of "mass shootings."
30 years ago, 4 people wasn't a "mass shooting" but it is now, and that would be part of the Göbbelization I mention often.
That's been happening for millennia, not centuries, and not decades.
There are accounts of deranged people going to a market place -- 'cause, you know, they didn't have Wal-Marts back then -- and hacking a dozen or more people to death with knives or swords before the were slain or wrestled to the ground.
So, stop acting like it's a totally new phenomenon.
Instead of whining on this forum, you ought to be asking your State legislators why they don't have a constitutionally-conforming procedure in place to disarm the mentally ill and those who are aggressively violent and also prevent them from obtaining firearms.
The left and the right cannot agree on what those words mean. With that in mind, I do think some clarification is necessary if we are to restore civility in our politics.
As others have said the constitution is pretty clear on all of this. There is no way or will to amend the constitution to do what you suggest.
That division is artificially created, by people like you.
Sure, if everyone would just live their lives like it's a 1955 black-and-white sitcom, there would be no division.
Everyone would go to a Bible-believing (i.e. GOP-approved) church on Sunday. Every school day would open with a prayer and the pledge of allegiance. Brown people happy to remain in their place, subservient to their white masters. Homosexuality would be deep in the closet and not accepted in any fashion. Weed is still illegal in all 50 states. No cursing or swearing on TV and definitely no skin allowed to show, period. Women in the kitchen, happy to waltz around their homes cleaning while wearing a dress and high heels. Somehow, her husband, who comes home from work everyday in his suit and tie and slicked back hair, manages to support such a lifestyle on $7.25/hour. Schools teach abstinence-only sex education and in science class, young-earth creationism apologetics are taught instead of evolution.
Sure, if that was our society there would be no division.
Federal Form 4473 the form of which Hunter Biden deliberately lied on to illegally purchase a handgun lists all of the conditions to lawfully purchase and possess a firearm. Deliberately lying on that form is a federal crime punishable by 10 years in prison and a $250,000 fine. Do you think that the Honorable AG Merrick Garland will launch an investigation into this, file charges and prosecute? If not then I guess both him and Hunter's old man are okay with drug addicts possessing firearms and people lying on a federal form in order to obtain them?
Not only does this demonstrate the ineffectiveness of the average gun law, but it also shows us the two tier society we live in, and none of us is in that upper tier.
Sure, if everyone would just live their lives like it's a 1955 black-and-white sitcom, there would be no division.
Everyone would go to a Bible-believing (i.e. GOP-approved) church on Sunday. Every school day would open with a prayer and the pledge of allegiance. Brown people happy to remain in their place, subservient to their white masters. Homosexuality would be deep in the closet and not accepted in any fashion. Weed is still illegal in all 50 states. No cursing or swearing on TV and definitely no skin allowed to show, period. Women in the kitchen, happy to waltz around their homes cleaning while wearing a dress and high heels. Somehow, her husband, who comes home from work everyday in his suit and tie and slicked back hair, manages to support such a lifestyle on $7.25/hour. Schools teach abstinence-only sex education and in science class, young-earth creationism apologetics are taught instead of evolution.
Sure, if that was our society there would be no division.
Interesting that you skip back 70 years to find your examples. Also interesting that you failed to acknowledge the progress made in that 70 years toward those issues, and who's responsible for making it happen.
I don't know where you got your world view, but you need to go back to them and demand compensation for the damage they've done. Your perception of conservatives is far beyond a caricature. Way worse than a stereotype. And the worst part? You seem to have intentionally taken all the worst claims collectively made against people you don't know, rolled them up into a ball and you're presenting that ball of BS as the typical conservative.
This thread went south fast. OP grenades his own creation. Nice job.
Not only does this demonstrate the ineffectiveness of the average gun law, but it also shows us the two tier society we live in, and none of us is in that upper tier.
Indeed it does. It also shows the blatant hypocrisy of our political adversaries.
David Chipman, Biden's avowed anti gun nominee for ATF director likes to claim that he's a gun owner, has a concealed carry permit and believes in the 2nd Amendment. He's a guns for me but not for thee person. What the hell does he have to worry about? As a member of the ruling class he'll always be able to bear arms wherever the hell chooses to go.
Micheal Bloomberg during the Democrat primaries was asked by a voter why he goes around with an armed entourage while simultaneously being an anti gun advocate. His answer: Because he was the Mayor of New York City and a billionaire and can afford to hire armed bodyguards.
Quote:
NYC's Michael Bloomberg accused of 'hypocrisy' for arming ... https://www.washingtontimes.com/news...isy-arming-se/
Mar 26, 2013 · The New York Times first reported of this disparity in 2010, stating that the mayor uses taxpayer dollars to pay for two armed city officers to accompany him on get-away jaunts to Bermuda.
Voter calls out Mike Bloomberg on armed guards, gun control ... https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/o...trol-hypocrisy
Mar 03, 2020 · Democratic presidential candidate Michael Bloomberg wants to restrict your right to self-defense severely. All the while, the billionaire travels from city to city with an armed security detail....
Quote:
“How do you justify pushing for more gun control when you have an armed security detail that is likely equipped with the same firearms and magazines that you seek to ban the common citizen from owning?” the voter asked. “Does your life matter more than mine or my family’s?”
Bloomberg responded by saying he “probably” gets death threats at least “40 or 50 times a week.”
“That just happens when you are the mayor of New York City or you are very wealthy, and if you are campaigning for president of the United States, you get lots of threats,” he said. https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/n...on-gun-control
Last edited by Ex New Yorker; 06-29-2021 at 06:46 PM..
We should not touch one word, one letter in our Constitution while this woke insanity holds influence in our society. If we let their pious little noses in to the tent they will barge in and destroy everything. Amending our Constitution is an endeavor for cooler heads, not inflamed passions.
We should not touch one word, one letter in our Constitution while this woke insanity holds influence in our society. If we let their pious little noses in to the tent they will barge in and destroy everything. Amending our Constitution is an endeavor for cooler heads, not inflamed passions.
Will a suitable replacement for those several original amendments be found that can be ratified by enough states? No.
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.
