The Gun debate renewed

archives said:
Oh really, show us in the Constitution where it says Congress can create an Air Force, print paper money or regulate immigration. Where would one find the right of privacy, to travel, innocent till proven guilty, executive privilege, or even God, just to mention a few

What you know about the Constitution is what the NRA propaganda tells you about the Constitution, of which you accept blindly as factual, and little else
Click to expand...

have YOU ever read the Constitution? If so, then you would KNOW where congress can create an armed force, or that they can create currency, and regulate immigration. the constitution does not grant rights, it prescribes government powers and limits those powers to the minimum necessary to exercise those powers.

It appears that you know less about the constitution than my dogs do.
 
SmarterthanYou said:
no matter how many times you try to debunk the truth as 'NRA' quotes, nothing will change the fact that they are actual quotes and intentions from the founding fathers.

would you like court cases that ALSO clearly discuss individual rights to keep and bear arms?????
Click to expand...

No, not true, especially given that the NRA doesn’t have a good track record in supplying truth

“What did the founding fathers really say about guns?”
https://danreitzdotcom.medium.com/what-did-the-founding-fathers-really-say-about-guns-9811cf7a6fdc

”The Famous Pro-Gun "Quotes" the Founding Fathers Never Actually Said”
https://www.gawker.com/the-famous-pro-gun-quotes-the-founding-fathers-never-1567962573

”Did Jefferson really say that? Why bogus quotations matter in gun debate”
https://www.cnn.com/2013/01/11/opinion/jefferson-fake-gun-quotation/index.html

”Fake quotes by Founding Fathers”
https://www.q13fox.com/news/fake-qu...luded-in-gun-rights-bill-filed-in-legislature

And all the Court cases, even the abominations passed by the Robert’s Court confirms guns can be regulated
 
SmarterthanYou said:
have YOU ever read the Constitution? If so, then you would KNOW where congress can create an armed force, or that they can create currency, and regulate immigration. the constitution does not grant rights, it prescribes government powers and limits those powers to the minimum necessary to exercise those powers.

It appears that you know less about the constitution than my dogs do.
Click to expand...

No, you are mistaken again, no where does it say Air Force, raise an army and navy, but no mention of Air Force. Nor is printing money mentioned, coins, but not paper currency. Same with all the others I listed, plus dozens more, they all were implied powers interpreted years later

Point being the Constitution is not a static, word for word document, if it were, Jefferson never could have purchased Louisiana, nothing in it is absolute, including any Amendment, 18th proves that accurate
 
The National Shooting Sports Foundation, the gun industry’s trade group, publishes firearm production reports that draw on a host of sources, including the ATF, the U.S. International Trade Commission, and the Congressional Research Service. In 2020, the group reported that “the estimated total number of overall firearms in civilian possession is 433.9 million.”
thetrace.org


That was three years ago, there are probably 500 million guns now.

Lots of luck taking them.
 
archives said:
No, you are mistaken again, no where does it say Air Force, raise an army and navy, but no mention of Air Force. Nor is printing money mentioned, coins, but not paper currency. Same with all the others I listed, plus dozens more, they all were implied powers interpreted years later

Point being the Constitution is not a static, word for word document, if it were, Jefferson never could have purchased Louisiana, nothing in it is absolute, including any Amendment, 18th proves that accurate
Click to expand...

Anchovies, the first airplane was flown around 1900.

The Constitution was written in 1787.

Good grief, poor Anchovies.
 
Truth Detector said:
The usual morons will be thread banned.

I am so tired of dishonest lying Democrats pretending they care about gun violence when they are the party of violent BLM riots, the party of Defunding the police and the Party of absolving crimes based on the color of one's skin.

I am also tired of the dishonest narrative blaming cops and white people for the cesspool of crime in Democratically controlled urban shit holes.

I want someone on the left to coherently argue how MORE laws are going to stop criminals from breaking all the myriad of laws we already have on the books.

This Florida Sheriff said it best:

'All The Gun Laws In Place Didn't Prevent It, Did It? Neither Will Any New Ones'

'We're not going to fix it': Why lawmakers see no chance of major gun law changes after Nashville

WASHINGTON – Lawmakers from both parties said the prospects for major gun control legislation advancing in a divided Congress are slim even as President Joe Biden said he has exhausted what he can do to address gun violence through executive action.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news...ting-major-action-guns-long-shot/11557103002/
Click to expand...

Indeed.
 
Earl said:
The National Shooting Sports Foundation, the gun industry’s trade group, publishes firearm production reports that draw on a host of sources, including the ATF, the U.S. International Trade Commission, and the Congressional Research Service. In 2020, the group reported that “the estimated total number of overall firearms in civilian possession is 433.9 million.”
thetrace.org


That was three years ago, there are probably 500 million guns now.

Lots of luck taking them.
Click to expand...

Yeah, correct, and the accelerating number of school/shootings proves it
 
Earl said:
Anchovies, the first airplane was flown around 1900.

The Constitution was written in 1787.

Good grief, poor Anchovies.
Click to expand...

Exactly, proves my point, the strict constructionist view you have of the Constitution is antiquated, and that fact applies to they way you interpret the entire document
 
archives said:
No, not true, especially given that the NRA doesn’t have a good track record in supplying truth

“What did the founding fathers really say about guns?”
https://danreitzdotcom.medium.com/what-did-the-founding-fathers-really-say-about-guns-9811cf7a6fdc

”The Famous Pro-Gun "Quotes" the Founding Fathers Never Actually Said”
https://www.gawker.com/the-famous-pro-gun-quotes-the-founding-fathers-never-1567962573

”Did Jefferson really say that? Why bogus quotations matter in gun debate”
https://www.cnn.com/2013/01/11/opinion/jefferson-fake-gun-quotation/index.html

”Fake quotes by Founding Fathers”
https://www.q13fox.com/news/fake-qu...luded-in-gun-rights-bill-filed-in-legislature

And all the Court cases, even the abominations passed by the Robert’s Court confirms guns can be regulated
Click to expand...

non credible links and your court case information is wrong, as usual.
 
archives said:
Exactly, proves my point, the strict constructionist view you have of the Constitution is antiquated, and that fact applies to they way you interpret the entire document
Click to expand...

here's how you fail as an American. The 'strict constructionist' looks at the Constitution as a means of limiting and restricting the government. A 'living document' theorist, one who wants to 'interpret' the Constitution as it would apply in the current time, looks at the Constitution as a means of restricting the people. Something that is completely at odds with what the framers intended. So, ask yourself, why are you against freedom?
 
archives said:
Yeah, correct, and the accelerating number of school/shootings proves it
Click to expand...

I blame it on 24/7 news . We had a lot of kids like myself that had guns in our cars in the High school parking lot. We used to hunt after school. So the guns were there and available. 24hr national news service has made it easier for people that want to commit suicide to go out with national coverage.
 
SmarterthanYou said:
here's how you fail as an American. The 'strict constructionist' looks at the Constitution as a means of limiting and restricting the government. A 'living document' theorist, one who wants to 'interpret' the Constitution as it would apply in the current time, looks at the Constitution as a means of restricting the people. Something that is completely at odds with what the framers intended. So, ask yourself, why are you against freedom?
Click to expand...
The Constitution has a method to be updated to current times.
 
archives said:
The gun laws on the books suck, nearly anyone in the US can get a gun if they want one, you can even arrange to get one on the regular Internet, it’s a joke without Federal laws
Click to expand...

It's impossible to pass any law to control guns in America!
Even if Guns were 100 % illegal!
Wouldn't matter,we tried that with booze,with weed!
Neither were hard to find on streets of America, same thing would apply to gun prohibition!
 
Mason Michaels said:
It's impossible to pass any law to control guns in America!
Even if Guns were 100 % illegal!
Wouldn't matter,we tried that with booze,with weed!
Neither were hard to find on streets of America, same thing would apply to gun prohibition!
Click to expand...

Indeed.

The last figures that I have seen show America has about 500 million guns.

Lots of luck taking them from those who own them.

Poor LV...he can't post on his own thread...he has been banned.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top