• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Clearing the air on guns, anti gun owners start.

CRUE CAB

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 21, 2013
Messages
16,763
Reaction score
4,343
Location
Melbourne Florida
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Let the "anti gunners" say first just exactly what it is they have against many of us excersizing our 2A rights.
Is it the Zimmerman type of self defense, not trying to re try the case seeing as its settled law.
Is it just that you dont believe that in 2013 we should be owning such things. Or is it against certian types of firearms?
Moot, Haymarket, Sharon and the rest have the floor. No name calling, no calling out, no assumptions about people you dont actually know.
 

haymarket

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 3, 2010
Messages
120,933
Reaction score
28,509
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
My position has always been quite clear. I am not anti-gun. I support the Second Amendment and the right to keep and bear arms.

I am anti gun lobby. I am anti NRA.

And there is a difference. Some do not want to see that difference, but it is there just the same.

One of the dividing lines is the claim that we need guns to someday fight in the great right wing moment of jubilee when we rise up against the government in Civil War Redux. That is where I part ways.

You want a gun for home protection? Fine with me.
You want a gun for self defense? Fine with me.
You need a gun for your business? Terrific.
You want a gun to hunt? great.
How about sport like target shooting? Go for it and enjoy.
Collecting? Sure - I am a hard core collector and know what the bug is like when you are into something. for me - its not guns but I have no problem with those that collect guns.

But like John Lennon said about revolution and guns - count me out. Screw that nonsense and it ain't 1776 anymore and the British oppressors are long gone. Anybody who think they are going to outfight the American military has his head somewhere very dark and very much isolated from reality.

Here is my position that I have stated many times:

I have stated this before and I state it again for your benefit: here is my interpretation of the Second Amendment.


The Second Amendment says that the American people have the right to keep and bear arms. The duly elected representatives of the American people may exercise their Constitutional powers to enact legislation controlling and regulating firearms so long as they do not create an environment where the people cannot exercise their right.


That is is. Pure and simple.






Every single legislator who has voted for any regulation of firearms has taken a position which is consistent with this interpretation.
Every single legislative body who has voted to pass a law for the regulation of firearms has taken a position which is consistent with this interpretation.
Every single governor who has proposed a law for any regulation of firearms has taken a position which is consistent with this interpretation.
Every single governor who has signed into law any regulation of firearms has taken a position which is consistent with this interpretation.
Every single president proposed a law for any regulation of firearms has taken a position which is consistent with this interpretation.
Every single president who has signed into law any regulation of firearms has taken a position which is consistent with this interpretation.
Every single judge or justice who has upheld the constitutionality of a law regulating firearms has taken a position which is consistent with this interpretation.
Every single Court which has voted to uphold the constitutionality of a law regulating firearms has taken a position which is consistent with this interpretation.


And it is the agreement of all those above with my interpretation which counts in the final analysis.






________________________________


I have repeatedly stated that if the government creates an environment where the people cannot exercise the right to bear arms, then the right has been INFRINGED. To define this in everyday terms of action all you have to do is apply one test. The test is simple and easy and not at all complicated:


If I as an American citizen want to obtain a firearm to exercise my second Amendment rights, am I able to do so? If the answer is YES, then the right is present and is able to be exercised. If the answer is NO, then the right has been infringed and that is prohibited by the Constitution. Of course, the person must be able to bear the gun, or have it available for its use. This is why the decision against DC in the Heller case shows that the government created such an illegal environment.

Thank you for the opportunity CRUE CAB. :2wave:It is appreciated. :peace
 
Last edited:

Dittohead not!

master political analyst
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 3, 2009
Messages
51,125
Reaction score
33,276
Location
The Golden State
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
My position has always been quite clear. I am not anti-gun. I support the Second Amendment and the right to keep and bear arms.

I am anti gun lobby. I am anti NRA.

And there is a difference. Some do not want to see that difference, but it is there just the same.

One of the dividing lines is the claim that we need guns to someday fight in the great right wing moment of jubilee when we rise up against the government in Civil War Redux. That is where I part ways.

You want a gun for home protection? Fine with me.
You want a gun for self defense? Fine with me.
You need a gun for your business? Terrific.
You want a gun to hunt? great.
How about sport like target shooting? Go for it and enjoy.

But when you talk about needing powerful guns for revolution - like John Lennon said - you can count me out.
Collecting? Sure - I am a hard core collector and know what the bug is like when you are into something. for me - its not guns but I have no problem with those that collect guns.
What he said.
The idea that a militia armed with hunting rifles and handguns could take over the government by force is tinfoil hat nonsense.
Better, let's stage a revolution at the ballot box.

But, by all means, let's keep the right to defend ourselves and our property. The government is less and less able to do so all the time.

I'm personally not into hunting. I'd rather be on the stream with a fly rod in hand, but, that's just me. If carrying a rifle through the woods looking for deer is your thing, go for it. Just let's not join the ranks of the idiots who dress in orange to ride in the back of a pickup truck while drinking beer and shooting at roadsigns. There are way too many of that type of "sportsmen" already.
 

CRUE CAB

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 21, 2013
Messages
16,763
Reaction score
4,343
Location
Melbourne Florida
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Come on, I know there are more than 2 whole posters that are between very anti gun to somewhat antigun.
 

cpgrad08

American
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 19, 2011
Messages
5,647
Reaction score
2,986
Location
Lakewood,WA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
My position has always been quite clear. I am not anti-gun. I support the Second Amendment and the right to keep and bear arms.

I am anti gun lobby. I am anti NRA.

And there is a difference. Some do not want to see that difference, but it is there just the same.

One of the dividing lines is the claim that we need guns to someday fight in the great right wing moment of jubilee when we rise up against the government in Civil War Redux. That is where I part ways.

You want a gun for home protection? Fine with me.
You want a gun for self defense? Fine with me.
You need a gun for your business? Terrific.
You want a gun to hunt? great.
How about sport like target shooting? Go for it and enjoy.
Collecting? Sure - I am a hard core collector and know what the bug is like when you are into something. for me - its not guns but I have no problem with those that collect guns.

But like John Lennon said about revolution and guns - count me out. Screw that nonsense and it ain't 1776 anymore and the British oppressors are long gone. Anybody who think they are going to outfight the American military has his head somewhere very dark and very much isolated from reality.

Here is my position that I have stated many times:

I have stated this before and I state it again for your benefit: here is my interpretation of the Second Amendment.


The Second Amendment says that the American people have the right to keep and bear arms. The duly elected representatives of the American people may exercise their Constitutional powers to enact legislation controlling and regulating firearms so long as they do not create an environment where the people cannot exercise their right.


That is is. Pure and simple.






Every single legislator who has voted for any regulation of firearms has taken a position which is consistent with this interpretation.
Every single legislative body who has voted to pass a law for the regulation of firearms has taken a position which is consistent with this interpretation.
Every single governor who has proposed a law for any regulation of firearms has taken a position which is consistent with this interpretation.
Every single governor who has signed into law any regulation of firearms has taken a position which is consistent with this interpretation.
Every single president proposed a law for any regulation of firearms has taken a position which is consistent with this interpretation.
Every single president who has signed into law any regulation of firearms has taken a position which is consistent with this interpretation.
Every single judge or justice who has upheld the constitutionality of a law regulating firearms has taken a position which is consistent with this interpretation.
Every single Court which has voted to uphold the constitutionality of a law regulating firearms has taken a position which is consistent with this interpretation.


And it is the agreement of all those above with my interpretation which counts in the final analysis.






________________________________


I have repeatedly stated that if the government creates an environment where the people cannot exercise the right to bear arms, then the right has been INFRINGED. To define this in everyday terms of action all you have to do is apply one test. The test is simple and easy and not at all complicated:


If I as an American citizen want to obtain a firearm to exercise my second Amendment rights, am I able to do so? If the answer is YES, then the right is present and is able to be exercised. If the answer is NO, then the right has been infringed and that is prohibited by the Constitution. Of course, the person must be able to bear the gun, or have it available for its use. This is why the decision against DC in the Heller case shows that the government created such an illegal environment.

Thank you for the opportunity CRUE CAB. :2wave:It is appreciated. :peace
Tell that to NVA, VC and the Taliban. A smaller inferior Guerrilla force can win against a superior standing army. Just saying.
 

TurtleDude

warrior of the wetlands
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 12, 2005
Messages
250,679
Reaction score
75,478
Location
Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
Tell that to NVA, VC and the Taliban. A smaller inferior Guerrilla force can win against a superior standing army. Just saying.
The government loving statists think it would be a few patriots vs the army when in reality it would be several million people killing the government toads who implemented a dictatorship
 

TurtleDude

warrior of the wetlands
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 12, 2005
Messages
250,679
Reaction score
75,478
Location
Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
My position has always been quite clear. I am not anti-gun. I support the Second Amendment and the right to keep and bear arms.

I am anti gun lobby. I am anti NRA.

And there is a difference. Some do not want to see that difference, but it is there just the same.

One of the dividing lines is the claim that we need guns to someday fight in the great right wing moment of jubilee when we rise up against the government in Civil War Redux. That is where I part ways.

You want a gun for home protection? Fine with me.
You want a gun for self defense? Fine with me.
You need a gun for your business? Terrific.
You want a gun to hunt? great.
How about sport like target shooting? Go for it and enjoy.
Collecting? Sure - I am a hard core collector and know what the bug is like when you are into something. for me - its not guns but I have no problem with those that collect guns.

But like John Lennon said about revolution and guns - count me out. Screw that nonsense and it ain't 1776 anymore and the British oppressors are long gone. Anybody who think they are going to outfight the American military has his head somewhere very dark and very much isolated from reality.

Here is my position that I have stated many times:

I have stated this before and I state it again for your benefit: here is my interpretation of the Second Amendment.


The Second Amendment says that the American people have the right to keep and bear arms. The duly elected representatives of the American people may exercise their Constitutional powers to enact legislation controlling and regulating firearms so long as they do not create an environment where the people cannot exercise their right.


That is is. Pure and simple.






Every single legislator who has voted for any regulation of firearms has taken a position which is consistent with this interpretation.
Every single legislative body who has voted to pass a law for the regulation of firearms has taken a position which is consistent with this interpretation.
Every single governor who has proposed a law for any regulation of firearms has taken a position which is consistent with this interpretation.
Every single governor who has signed into law any regulation of firearms has taken a position which is consistent with this interpretation.
Every single president proposed a law for any regulation of firearms has taken a position which is consistent with this interpretation.
Every single president who has signed into law any regulation of firearms has taken a position which is consistent with this interpretation.
Every single judge or justice who has upheld the constitutionality of a law regulating firearms has taken a position which is consistent with this interpretation.
Every single Court which has voted to uphold the constitutionality of a law regulating firearms has taken a position which is consistent with this interpretation.


And it is the agreement of all those above with my interpretation which counts in the final analysis.






________________________________


I have repeatedly stated that if the government creates an environment where the people cannot exercise the right to bear arms, then the right has been INFRINGED. To define this in everyday terms of action all you have to do is apply one test. The test is simple and easy and not at all complicated:


If I as an American citizen want to obtain a firearm to exercise my second Amendment rights, am I able to do so? If the answer is YES, then the right is present and is able to be exercised. If the answer is NO, then the right has been infringed and that is prohibited by the Constitution. Of course, the person must be able to bear the gun, or have it available for its use. This is why the decision against DC in the Heller case shows that the government created such an illegal environment.

Thank you for the opportunity CRUE CAB. :2wave:It is appreciated. :peace
translation-if you can own one gun than nothing the government does in the future can be seen as infringing on your rights according to hay market

read one book or make one speech and forever your first amendment rights are intact

that is so idiotic. The second amendment is a prohibition on government action. whether you own a gun or not does not change whether the government is wrong or not
 

cpgrad08

American
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 19, 2011
Messages
5,647
Reaction score
2,986
Location
Lakewood,WA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
The government loving statists think it would be a few patriots vs the army when in reality it would be several million people killing the government toads who implemented a dictatorship
True that, but even then I love it when people think that U.S. Military can't be defeated by a smaller force.
 

TurtleDude

warrior of the wetlands
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 12, 2005
Messages
250,679
Reaction score
75,478
Location
Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
True that, but even then I love it when people think that U.S. Military can't be defeated by a smaller force.
YOu don't fight the military, you kill the scumbags running things
 

cpgrad08

American
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 19, 2011
Messages
5,647
Reaction score
2,986
Location
Lakewood,WA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
YOu don't fight the military, you kill the scumbags running things
If a 2nd Revolution comes about in America there are going to be Military forces that stay loyal to the government and they will be protecting those scumbags. So we would have to fight the U.S. Military to a point.
 

TurtleDude

warrior of the wetlands
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 12, 2005
Messages
250,679
Reaction score
75,478
Location
Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
If a 2nd Revolution comes about in America there are going to be Military forces that stay loyal to the government and they will be protecting those scumbags. So we would have to fight the U.S. Military to a point.
true but the main targets are the soft ones
 

Sisyphus

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 12, 2013
Messages
1,185
Reaction score
151
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
Let the "anti gunners" say first just exactly what it is they have against many of us excersizing our 2A rights.
Is it the Zimmerman type of self defense, not trying to re try the case seeing as its settled law.
Is it just that you dont believe that in 2013 we should be owning such things. Or is it against certian types of firearms?
Moot, Haymarket, Sharon and the rest have the floor. No name calling, no calling out, no assumptions about people you dont actually know.
I'm okay with guns, but do tire of those who cannot own one without whining about it.
 

TurtleDude

warrior of the wetlands
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 12, 2005
Messages
250,679
Reaction score
75,478
Location
Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right

Sisyphus

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 12, 2013
Messages
1,185
Reaction score
151
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
uh who is that in reference to?
Quite a few of the gun-loving Right, calling Obama a gun-grabber, which is nonsense, etc.

When anyone of note (authority) advocates removal of 2A rights, be real sure and let me know. K?
 

TurtleDude

warrior of the wetlands
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 12, 2005
Messages
250,679
Reaction score
75,478
Location
Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
Quite a few of the gun-loving Right, calling Obama a gun-grabber, which is nonsense, etc.

When anyone of note (authority) advocates removal of 2A rights, be real sure and let me know. K?
a ban on 30 round magazines is an infringement of our rights

same with a ban on guns that cause people like you to become afraid is to

Obama would ban guns if he could He cannot so he incrementally pisses on our rights
 

Sisyphus

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 12, 2013
Messages
1,185
Reaction score
151
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
a ban on 30 round magazines is an infringement of our rights

same with a ban on guns that cause people like you to become afraid is to

Obama would ban guns if he could He cannot so he incrementally pisses on our rights
No; it's not. All manner of weapons are reserved for military use, in today's world. If you wanna go framer intent, can our military (which they feared). Then also have the responsibility to be called up to defend the country, should we need you for a militia. That's what the 2A is: an alternative to a standing army, which the FF feared would lead to coup d'état.

But today we need a military, due to the world moving faster than it did back then, when a war would take months to get under way. So the Supremes took a part of it and applied it in today's world: self defense. And when the SCOTUS determines that 30 rounds is anything but offensive, be reeeeeeal sure to let me know.
 

TurtleDude

warrior of the wetlands
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 12, 2005
Messages
250,679
Reaction score
75,478
Location
Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
No; it's not. All manner of weapons are reserved for military use, in today's world. If you wanna go framer intent, can our military (which they feared). Then also have the responsibility to me called up to defend the country, should we need you. That's what the 2A is: an alternative to a standing army, which the FF fear would lead to coup d'état.

But today we need a military, due to the world moving faster than it did back then, when a war would take months to get under way. So the FF took a part of it and applied it in today's world: self defense. And when the SCOTUS determines that 30 rounds is anything but offensive, be reeeeeeal sure to let me know.


that's moronic. Civilian police departments who cannot shoot people under circumstances different than we do have them
 

Goshin

The Hammer of Chaos
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 16, 2009
Messages
45,508
Reaction score
50,072
Location
Dixie
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
I'm okay with guns, but do tire of those who cannot own one without whining about it.

You'd probably be a bit irritated as well, if a third of your elected representatives were trying hard to remove a Constitutional right that you highly valued. Just sayin'... everybody rolls their eyes until it is THEIR personal ox getting gored.
 

AlabamaPaul

Pragmatist
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 24, 2013
Messages
8,834
Reaction score
2,812
Location
Alabama
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
I'm not sure defeated is the right word but Ho Chi Minh and his boys put up a pretty good fight.
When one is required to fight with both hands tied behind his back, it can make an opponent look a bit tougher...
 

Sisyphus

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 12, 2013
Messages
1,185
Reaction score
151
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
You'd probably be a bit irritated as well, if a third of your elected representatives were trying hard to remove a Constitutional right that you highly valued. Just sayin'... everybody rolls their eyes until it is THEIR personal ox getting gored.
I would indeed. Thankfully that's only happening in your delusional mind.
 

TurtleDude

warrior of the wetlands
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 12, 2005
Messages
250,679
Reaction score
75,478
Location
Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
I would indeed. Thankfully that's only happening in your delusional mind.
This sort of comment is not going to go well for you. He is right, many dems have tried to destroy our second amendment rights.
 
Top Bottom