Democrats should be against gun control

[blaxshep]

The Second Amendment says what it says. If you don't like the Constitution, then pass an amendment to change it.

in·fringe [in-frinj] Show IPA verb, in·fringed, in·fring·ing.
verb (used with object)
1.
to commit a breach or infraction of; violate or transgress: to infringe a copyright; to infringe a rule.
verb (used without object)
2.
to encroach or trespass (usually followed by on or upon ): Don't infringe on his privacy.
Origin:
1525–35; < Latin infringere to break, weaken, equivalent to in- in-2 + -fringere, combining form of frangere to break

Related forms
in·fring·er, noun
un·in·fringed, adjective

Can be confused: infringe, impinge.

Synonyms
1. break, disobey. 2. poach. See trespass.

Uh oh, you better how haymarket didn't see that.

 

[code1211]

Uh oh, you better how haymarket didn't see that.

Just sayin'.

 

[blaxshep]

Just sayin'.

I'm on your side.

 

[Muddy Creek]

The Second Amendment says what it says. If you don't like the Constitution, then pass an amendment to change it.

in·fringe [in-frinj] Show IPA verb, in·fringed, in·fring·ing.
verb (used with object)
1.
to commit a breach or infraction of; violate or transgress: to infringe a copyright; to infringe a rule.
verb (used without object)
2.
to encroach or trespass (usually followed by on or upon ): Don't infringe on his privacy.
Origin:
1525–35; < Latin infringere to break, weaken, equivalent to in- in-2 + -fringere, combining form of frangere to break

Related forms
in·fring·er, noun
un·in·fringed, adjective

Can be confused: infringe, impinge.

Synonyms
1. break, disobey. 2. poach. See trespass.

None of the still addresses the idea that background checks on sales of ALL guns does NOT violate the constitution. It stops criminals and the mentally ill from having access to weapons. That doesn't "infringe" on the rights of every other person in owning a gun.

 

[Muddy Creek]

Voting is an essential Constitutional right. Keeping and bearing arms is an equally-essential Constitutional right.

In the past, there have been efforts to use “literacy tests” and “poll taxes” to selectively deny the right to vote. This has been deemed to be illegal and unconstitutional.

You advocate similar measures to selectively deny the right to keep and bear arms. I say that what you advocate is equally illegal and unconstitutional; and that your purpose and motives are no different than those of those who pushed for the use of “literacy tests” and “poll taxes”.

If you think for one minute that criminals and the insane have rights to access guns easily and kill children, and that you are trying to equate that with black people voting, then I'm afraid you've stepped off the deep end and have no reasoning left.

 

[Muddy Creek]

you are just mad that your interpretation of what I said was (like everything else you post on gun issues) a complete falsehood

No. But I am getting quite disgusted at how deceptive you are and incapable of backing up your comments with any type of information. I've shown evidence that refutes your comments. So, it seems to me you really aren't here to discuss. You're just here to pass on the misinformation from the right wing pundits. Am I wrong?

 

[Muddy Creek]

Weapon holdings statistics - countries compared worldwide ...
Weapon holdings statistics - countries compared worldwide - NationMaster
Country comparison of Weapon holdings (Military) Military stats. Weapon-holdings includes definition, source, graph and map.:2wave:

From your site.

The idea for NationMaster arose as I was surfing around the CIA World Factbook. It's a great read but I felt the individual figures (like number of TV's, or kilometres of coastline) didn't mean much on their own. They'd be more illuminating if they were placed alongside other countries and shown relative to population.


So I decided to put together a website that allowed users to generate graphs based on numerical data extracted from the Factbook. The next (rather obvious) realisation was that there's no reason I couldn't take in data from other sources. Why shouldn't the net have a central location that allows you to compare countries on any statistic you like?


But why did I do it? To promote education and understanding about the world. To make it easy to engage with the indicators that shape global commerce, health, politics and ecology. To make the facts easily accessible and meaningful. To bring the works of academics, public agencies and private researchers to a wider audience.


One intended use for this site is, during debates in discussion groups, people link to comparisons of specific countries. I hope students, educators and librarians will find the site a useful teaching aide. More generally, I hope the figures will spark people's interest and they'll want to read more.


-- Luke Metcalfe, Manager / Developer

Not sure I'd trust a blogger building a website with good information. While I applaud the fact you actually took time to look for something, I just think it's a little "iffy", you know?

Expenditures on military

List of countries by military expenditures - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I like this for a site on military might rankings. You may not, but I do.

Global Firepower Military Ranks - 2013

 

[Muddy Creek]

How is the right to vote “suspended” when voters are required to pay poll taxes and pass “literacy tests” as a condition of being allowed to vote?

You want to come with this at me again? You don't need to pay poll taxes and pass literacy tests to vote up until the republicans thought it would steal the presidency for them in 2012. That didn't work. And requiring those two items is being challenged and knocked down in courts.

 

[Muddy Creek]

you mean this?


I guess you cannot tell the difference between when and actually saying they should

is there a set of conditions that would justify people rising up against the government-certainly

what is your stupid point? do you deny that there is ever a time that people should rebel or RISE UP AGAINST THE GOVERNMENT?

No, YOUR stupid point was to let the poster know it wasn't to rebel but to RISE up against the government. You can go on playing stupid about this all you want. I think you probably will. I get the fact you're trying to save face but I really have to tell you. You look pretty foolish trying to close the barn door after the cows have escaped.

 

[Muddy Creek]

Just in terms of numbers of weapons, we have many times fewer than the rest of the world combined. Our advantage (and our expense) is in technological superiority, not numbers, and that drives our budget.eace

That's just not true. You link didn't show that. And by numbers we have far more stockpiled here...still being made from the pork barrels Congress gives their districts.

 

[Jack Hays]

From your site.



Not sure I'd trust a blogger building a website with good information. While I applaud the fact you actually took time to look for something, I just think it's a little "iffy", you know?

Expenditures on military

List of countries by military expenditures - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I like this for a site on military might rankings. You may not, but I do.

Global Firepower Military Ranks - 2013

I have no problem with your sites, but they don't answer the question you asked. You asked about numbers of weapons. The site I linked is quirky, but yours was a quirky question.eace

 

[Muddy Creek]

I have no problem with your sites, but they don't answer the question you asked. You asked about numbers of weapons. The site I linked is quirky, but yours was a quirky question.eace

Not so much. Our $700 BN buys more weapons than the total amount of dollars spent by others who either buy our weapons or Israel's or Japan's. Not many are in the business of making weapons like the US is.

 

[Jack Hays]

That's just not true. You link didn't show that. And by numbers we have far more stockpiled here...still being made from the pork barrels Congress gives their districts.

The site I linked shows precisely that we have many times fewer weapons than the rest of the world combined. Just eyeballing the graphs, it looks like the rest of the world has five or six times as many as we do by ourselves.eace

 

[Muddy Creek]

The site I linked shows precisely that we have many times fewer weapons than the rest of the world combined. Just eyeballing the graphs, it looks like the rest of the world has five or six times as many as we do by ourselves.eace

And again, yours is a questionable blogger. Mine shows the break down of the tanks, air force, etc. and I think we're pretty much ahead of the game on weapons. ON nuclear submarines with missiles we lead. Then let's factor in our drones and then our fire power from scuds, tanks, etc. We pretty much kick butt.

 

[Jack Hays]

Not so much. Our $700 BN buys more weapons than the total amount of dollars spent by others who either buy our weapons or Israel's or Japan's. Not many are in the business of making weapons like the US is.

No, again. As I posted earlier, our money goes to technological superiority: better quality, not more quantity.eace

 

[Jack Hays]

And again, yours is a questionable blogger. Mine shows the break down of the tanks, air force, etc. and I think we're pretty much ahead of the game on weapons. ON nuclear submarines with missiles we lead. Then let's factor in our drones and then our fire power from scuds, tanks, etc. We pretty much kick butt.

I do not dispute that we are the most powerful, but your claim was that we had more weapons than the rest of the world combined, and that is plainly false.eace

 

[TurtleDude]

If you think for one minute that criminals and the insane have rights to access guns easily and kill children, and that you are trying to equate that with black people voting, then I'm afraid you've stepped off the deep end and have no reasoning left.

I guess you haven't figured out that such possession is already barred by federal law. But I am not going to give up my rights in order to allegedly prevent people who have always been able to obtain weapons from getting them

 

[TurtleDude]

No. But I am getting quite disgusted at how deceptive you are and incapable of backing up your comments with any type of information. I've shown evidence that refutes your comments. So, it seems to me you really aren't here to discuss. You're just here to pass on the misinformation from the right wing pundits. Am I wrong?

I have never said anything that is wrong or dishonest on guns. It is you who continually post dishonest nonsense.

 

[TurtleDude]

No, YOUR stupid point was to let the poster know it wasn't to rebel but to RISE up against the government. You can go on playing stupid about this all you want. I think you probably will. I get the fact you're trying to save face but I really have to tell you. You look pretty foolish trying to close the barn door after the cows have escaped.

and you apparently think there is a material difference between rebelling or rising up against the government. I never said that should happen. I said a PROGRESSIVE is not in a position to tell PATRIOTS when they should

I cannot help it if you cannot understand what I wrote.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

If you think for one minute that criminals and the insane have rights to access guns easily and kill children, and that you are trying to equate that with black people voting, then I'm afraid you've stepped off the deep end and have no reasoning left.

The Second Amendment does not authorize government to pick and choose who may or may not exercise the right affirmed therein. If you think that it should, then ask your elected representatives to begin the process of ratifying a new amendment to supersede the Second, modifying it to allow the exceptions that you think should exist.

And the Second Amendment also does not authorize government to require anyone to prove that they are entitled to exercise the right affirmed therein, before they are allowed to do so. The use of background checks, permit requirements, and such to selectively deny and/or impair Second Amendment rights is indeed exactly the same thing as the past use of “literacy tests” and “poll taxes” to selectively deny voting rights. Your advocacy and defense of the former makes you not the least bit better than those who employed the latter.

 

[code1211]

None of the still addresses the idea that background checks on sales of ALL guns does NOT violate the constitution. It stops criminals and the mentally ill from having access to weapons. That doesn't "infringe" on the rights of every other person in owning a gun.

What restrictions does the Second Amendment place on the qualifications of one individual as opposed to another?

 

[Paschendale]

The problem really isn't the guns. It's the fetishising of violence, which gun proponents propagate. It's the antisocial attitude of the isolationist. It's the "if you try to promote a social agenda that I don't like, then I'll shoot you" arguments. It's the fact that being armed is a necessarily aggressive stance, and it's very difficult to carry on in civilized manner with people who are willing and able to kill you for disagreeing with them. It is the fact that people say "if you try to raise my taxes in order to feed the homeless, we'll kill you" and mean it.

But seriously, when you talk about "second amendment solutions" to not getting your way in the democratic process, what kind of response did you expect?

 

[code1211]

You want to come with this at me again? You don't need to pay poll taxes and pass literacy tests to vote up until the republicans thought it would steal the presidency for them in 2012. That didn't work. And requiring those two items is being challenged and knocked down in courts.

The Republicans wanted poll taxes and literacy tests? Do you have a link?

Of course, when the heavily minority, heavily Democrat county in Florida went 90% for Pat Buchanan trying to vote for Gore and gave Bush the election, a literacy test might be called for, but that is a different topic.

 

[code1211]

Iraq is certainly not an Islamic state.:roll:

Give it time.

 

[code1211]

I would agree with that provided that only issues where conflict of interest exists.

All issues of government concern the collection of and the expenditure of money.