NRA and Right Wing Talking About Breaking Our Constitution

Anti-Party

Anti-Party

Tea Is The New Kool-Aid
Text of the 2nd Amendment

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

The NRA and most of the Right Wing are screaming "No more gun control!" Some are even saying we will go to civil war if there are any more gun control measures taken. Now what exactly changed that says we shouldn't regulate the Militia (the armed citizens)? Some may argue, "Militia means military" but that is incorrect and if it did, it would mean our guns aren't protected on the 2nd amendment, only the militarys.

Note that gun control does not mean gun grabbing. No one credible has stated the government is going to gun grab. The only people saying Obama is going to gun grab are the people who can profit off of gun sales! (Note that I wrote this before the speech today and if they say anything about gun grabbing I will own up to this statement! I'll make a whole "I was wrong" post!) Gun control is regulation which it clearly states is needed in the constitution to ensure major violence doesn't get out of hand and ensure we can keep the right to bear arms!

The only threat to our gun ownership as a whole, is if we do nothing about these military grade weapons on the market that have the ability to cause mass carnage. In other words, like the 2nd Amendment of our Constitution states, regulating these guns is important to ensure our freedom to keep them.

And if you are the type that thinks killing people is necessary to keep the government from killing you........watch this

 
In the video note the NRA saying "violent video games" is part of the reason for this chaos. Note that President Bush (worst president ever) is the one who started the free downloadable video game AmericasArmy which has cost the tax payers somewhere around 50Million dollars by now.
 
Anti-Party said:
Text of the 2nd Amendment
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
Click to expand...
The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home.

The NRA and most of the Right Wing are screaming "No more gun control!"
Click to expand...
Mostly because no version of "common sense gun control" would have stopped the Newtown shooting and will not stop another one.

Note that gun control does not mean gun grabbing.
Click to expand...
Gun control also does not mean enhanced public safety.
In fact, gun control means only that the rights of the law abiding are restricted for no good purpose.

The only threat to our gun ownership as a whole, is if we do nothing about these military grade weapons...
Click to expand...
"Military grade" has a specific meaning. You have no idea what it is, and as siuch, you are speaking from a position of abject ignorance.
 
It is the height of stupidity to believe that the founders, after having successfully freed themselves from an oppressive central government and standing army, would write that only the government and standing army had a right to bear arms.
 
sPzAbt505 said:
The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home.


Mostly because no version of "common sense gun control" would have stopped the Newtown shooting and will not stop another one.


Gun control also does not mean enhanced public safety.
In fact, gun control means only that the rights of the law abiding are restricted for no good purpose.


"Military grade" has a specific meaning. You have no idea what it is, and as siuch, you are speaking from a position of abject ignorance.
Click to expand...

You don't know the definition of "militia" Just because it sounds like "military" doesn't mean it's military. If you would have read the entire thread you would know this.

You stating there is no common sense gun control shows bias and a lack of common sense. Regulating magazine size gives citizens a chance to end a massacre or get away because citizens are taught to throw items/textbooks at the shooter which could give them enough time to escape or take down the shooter. NO ONE can tell me why a 100 round magazine is necessary for civilian use. Is it a guarantee it will stop all massacres, no. It's just a common sense effort.

Military grade does have a specific meaning. Guns originally manufactured for military use have tons of specific trademarks such as lightweight design, large capacity magazine options, smaller bullets to ensure the gun stays lightweight. Taking away the "full auto" is practically the only change they made to make them civilian use. You trying to argue that there is no difference between a military grade weapon and a regular weapon is a bias argument that only makes you look bad. Again, common sense is important here.
 
SmarterthanYou said:
It is the height of stupidity to believe that the founders, after having successfully freed themselves from an oppressive central government and standing army, would write that only the government and standing army had a right to bear arms.
Click to expand...

You translate the 2nd Amendment for me then. Here is my translation;

Regulating gun ownership, is necessary to ensure we are free from excessive gun violence which will ensure we will not have our guns taken away.

Your turn.
 
Millions of Americans are scared to go anywhere public with crowds of people. I'm pretty sure we are not living in a "Free State"
 
Anti-Party said:
You translate the 2nd Amendment for me then.
Click to expand...
The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home.
 
Anti-Party said:
You translate the 2nd Amendment for me then. Here is my translation;

Regulating gun ownership, is necessary to ensure we are free from excessive gun violence which will ensure we will not have our guns taken away.

Your turn.
Click to expand...
the peoples right to any and all arms that the government could use to oppress them shall no be infringed, for the best security of a free state is the whole of the people, with their arms.
 
Anti-Party said:
You don't know the definition of "militia" Just because it sounds like "military" doesn't mean it's military. If you would have read the entire thread you would know this.
Click to expand...
Irrelevant to everything I said.
The exercise of right protected by the 2nd has nothing to do with the militia, and so any argument that the right to arms must be "well regulated" is unsound.

You stating there is no common sense gun control shows bias and a lack of common sense.
Click to expand...
I laugh. Observe as I destroy your response.

Regulating magazine size gives citizens a chance to end a massacre or get away because citizens are taught to throw items/textbooks at the shooter which could give them enough time to escape or take down the shooter.
Click to expand...
Re-banning 'high-capacity' magazines will not have any effect on a shooting such as Newtown because millions of magazines ae already in ciculation, the magazine ban does not ban parts kits, and, most obviously, when you're the only one with a gun in a room of 6-7yr old kids, reload time is meaningless.
The Newtown shooter, even with a magazine ban could have easily gotten the magazines he had, and absent access to an AR-15, could have done every bit as much damage as he did with a pump-action shotgun w/ a 5rd tube.

If this is all the farther you can go with your 'common sense gun control' having an effect, its pretty clear that this matter is closed.

Military grade does have a specific meaning. Guns originally manufactured for military use have tons of specific trademarks such as lightweight design, large capacity magazine options, smaller bullets to ensure the gun stays lightweight.
Click to expand...
I was correct -- you do not know what military grade means. Thank you for the proof.
 
sPzAbt505 said:
The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home.
Click to expand...

You don't know what "translate" means either. I don't want your description of what it stands for in your brain..
 
Anti-Party said:
In the video note the NRA saying "violent video games" is part of the reason for this chaos. Note that President Bush (worst president ever) is the one who started the free downloadable video game AmericasArmy which has cost the tax payers somewhere around 50Million dollars by now.
Click to expand...

First off Bush was the second worst President ever.

And I guess we should all be forced to give up our video games too.
 
SmarterthanYou said:
the peoples right to any and all arms that the government could use to oppress them shall no be infringed, for the best security of a free state is the whole of the people, with their arms.
Click to expand...

You don't know what "translate" means either do you. No where in that amendment does it say anything anywhere NEAR what you just typed. "Any and all" what word translates to that? "Government could use to oppress them" what words translated to that?

I'm really starting to worry about these people..
 
Anti-Party said:
Millions of Americans are scared to go anywhere public with crowds of people. I'm pretty sure we are not living in a "Free State"
Click to expand...
You wouldn't have to worry if you lived in Texas. Most people have guns and carry them.

Yes, we're really a lot safer here in Texas.
 
sPzAbt505 said:
Irrelevant to everything I said.
The exercise of right protected by the 2nd has nothing to do with the militia, and so any argument that the right to arms must be "well regulated" is unsound.


I laugh. Observe as I destroy your response.

You win most uninformed citizen of the year award. You are literally saying that the 2nd amendment has nothing to do with the militia..........wow. Enough said right there. Brainy.

You saying a ban on large capacity would do nothing because they are already in circulation is uninformed as well. You clearly don't know the difference between production and stopped production. More in circulation means higher ability to get these.

Furthermore, I never said to gun grab so me not defining "military style weaponry" incorrectly in your blind bias eyes does not matter. I've always stood by magazine size limits and not gun grabbing. YOU jumped to that conclusion when you heard "gun control"

Re-banning 'high-capacity' magazines will not have any effect on a shooting such as Newtown because millions of magazines ae already in ciculation, the magazine ban does not ban parts kits, and, most obviously, when you're the only one with a gun in a room of 6-7yr old kids, reload time is meaningless.
The Newtown shooter, even with a magazine ban could have easily gotten the magazines he had, and absent access to an AR-15, could have done every bit as much damage as he did with a pump-action shotgun w/ a 5rd tube.

If this is all the farther you can go with your 'common sense gun control' having an effect, its pretty clear that this matter is closed.


I was correct -- you do not know what military grade means. Thank you for the proof.
Click to expand...

You win most uninformed citizen of the year award. You are literally saying that the 2nd amendment has nothing to do with the militia..........wow. Enough said right there. Brainy.

You saying a ban on large capacity would do nothing because they are already in circulation is uninformed as well. You clearly don't know the difference between production and stopped production. More in circulation means higher ability to get these.

Furthermore, I never said to gun grab so me not defining "military style weaponry" incorrectly in your blind bias eyes does not matter. I've always stood by magazine size limits and not gun grabbing. YOU jumped to that conclusion when you heard "gun control"

I never said anything about any specific shooting such as Newtown either. Where is your focus and critical thinking?
 
Liberty said:
First off Bush was the second worst President ever.

And I guess we should all be forced to give up our video games too.
Click to expand...

I never critisized video games, but yes, we should give up AmericasArmy video game. It's costing taxpayers millions..
 
Anti-Party said:
You translate the 2nd Amendment for me then. Here is my translation;

Regulating gun ownership, is necessary to ensure we are free from excessive gun violence which will ensure we will not have our guns taken away.

Your turn.
Click to expand...

I translate it as; everyone(adults) should own assault rifles in case the government becomes a tyrant, and forgets its place.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top