Glen Contrarian
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2013
- Messages
- 17,688
- Reaction score
- 8,046
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Progressive
This is false. Lincoln was a well known moderate on the issue of slavery.
THAT is why he was elected. He actually beat out a blatant anti-slavery firebrand for the Republican nomination, precisely because the party knew that a candidate running primarily on the issue of slavery would be unelectable.
The South simply wasn't willing to compromise at all, unfortunately.
For that matter, it's not even like Segregation was an exclusively Southern phenomenon anyway. It was simply a bit more "official" in the South, so it was more of a public struggle to get rid of it.
For that matter, it's not even like Segregation was an exclusively Southern phenomenon anyway. It was simply a bit more "official" in the South, so it was more of a public struggle to get rid of it.
Sooo... Yea. Sorry, man. I don't see any way in which either the C.S.A., or "Southern culture," is tied to what happened in Charleston. It was the act of a lone, and highly disturbed, individual, which has subsequently been condemned from basically all corners of the political spectrum.
The sooner people stop trying to make it into something it's not in the interests of fueling their own regional/cultural bigotry and ideological biases, the better.
Does "most whites in the South accept racism" EQUAL "an entire ideology is racist"? No. The mistake was yours, and everything I stated is true.
Does "conservative politics makes these tragedies more likely" EQUAL "every conflict is racism"? No. The mistake was yours, and everything I stated is true.
No, I doubt that. I figure you'll still respond, but only after making sure that no light of reality penetrates those assumption-colored glasses you're wearing - you know, the ones that lead you to make epic logical fails like those you've made in the past few replies.
There are roughly 130 million Americans who possess guns. There are over 3 million guns owned by American citizens. Yet only a tiny fraction of 1% use them to commit any crime much less murder. Do the math. The right to possess firearms is not the problem. And btw, gun violence is actually down by roughly 40% since 1994.
."There you go again"...with yet another broad-brush attack of your own.
You're assuming that we brand ALL gun owners with the same brush...when 32% of all Democrats ARE gun owners. As we have stated time and time AND TIME AGAIN, we aren't after the law-abiding gun owners - but we DO want to do what is necessary to keep the guns out of the hands of those who should not have them!
It's the gun-rights lobby that is ensuring the ease of access to guns by sexual predators, ex-felons, sociopaths, terrorists, and the like.
The measures we want do NOT restrict the ability of law-abiding gun owners to own (almost) any gun they want or how many guns they want. The measures we want are for keeping them out the hands of those who should never have them to begin with.
You've no clue. By your logic, it's an unconstitutional gun ban to restrict the public from buying 20MM helicopter-capable chain guns.
well if you had actually read about 400 posts of mine on the subject you would know that I think the issue involves individual arms and a 20MM chain gun is a crew served weapon. and btw there is actual constitutional support for arguing the federal government has no business restricting someone owning a chain gun as opposed to the silly comments that civilians ought to be limited to stuff of lesser grade than civilian police have
magazine limits
bans on select fire carbines
waiting periods
limits on how many guns you can buy in a month
are all blatant violations of the clear meaning of the 2A because the 2A is a limitation on what the government can do that does not change on what civilians can buy today, or tomorrow or next year or in a decade
Your opinion is unsupported by the documentation of the period when the Bill of Rights was ratified, although I'm sure you will have some guys who say otherwise.
ever read Sanford Levinson's "THE EMBARRASSING SECOND AMENDMENT"
tell me what in the constitution actually was intended by the FOUNDERS to allow federal gun control powers.
Can you find a single shred of documentation that supports federal gun control powers from that era
don't bother looking it doesn't exist
How can we compare the views of the Founding Fathers as neither Federalists or anti-Federalists believed the nation should support a "standing army" and inasmuch as the Founders lived in a very different world, it is difficult to state whether or not the Founders intended for Americans to have all the firearms they wish. We live in a very different world.
Are you in favour of eliminating the Army and the Air Force? The Navy and Marines were seen as essential defence elements in the 18th C. but not an army.
can you actually find a singe speech, letter, note or document from that time that even hints that the founders wanted the federal government to have a power over the private arms of private citizens and concurrent with the police powers of the "several states"? find me one. The last person I asked this to merely cited Article One Section 8 which was of course a complete failure
To suppose arms in the hands of citizens, to be used at individual discretion, except in private self-defense, or by partial orders of towns, countries or districts of a state, is to demolish every constitution, and lay the laws prostrate, so that liberty can be enjoyed by no man; it is a dissolution of the government. The fundamental law of the militia is, that it be created, directed and commanded by the laws, and ever for the support of the laws.
I'll ask again: Are you in favour of eliminating the Army and the Air Force? The Navy and Marines were seen as essential defence elements in the 18th C. but not an army. Standing armies were viewed as weapons used by governments/rulers to control their citizenry.
this is a thread about federal gun control being legitimate not other issues.
. . . can you actually find a singe speech, letter, note or document from that time that even hints that the founders wanted the federal government to have a power over the private arms of private citizens
It is related.
I notice that your response to the quote from John Adams failed to acknowledge your request for a Founding Father quote was answered.
For some reason, the modern gun nuts fail to acknowledge that whole "well-regulated militia" phrase found in the Second Amendment.
so its your learned opinion that the bill of rights is the source of a grant of power to the federal government? do you even comprehend how much of a fail that is to claim that the BILL OF RIGHTS was intended to give the FEDERAL government ADDITIONAL powers? do you understand that "well regulated" had nothing to do with FEDERAL powers and since the Second Amendment was well known to RECOGNIZE a pre-existing right rather than to CREATE any RIGHT OR POWER, your argument completely fails?
I disagree with your interpretation. AND you failed to acknowledge that I did provide a quote from a Founding Father.
Do you believe the US Army and Air Force should be disbanded? They are not in the Constitution.
1) your quote was irrelevant and you know that
2) Why are you diverting
3) have you figured out that the bill of rights does not GRANT any power to the federal government and there is numerous supreme court support for my argument
where is there any supreme court for your claim that the second amendment is the source of federal power to control firearms
and you are moving the goal posts - so, Good Night!
Cool stuff, isn't it weird that police in Cleveland can pull up on a 13 year old with an air soft and shoot him within 2 seconds but police in NJ and SC manage to catch armed suspects alive?
GOVERNMENT - REPUBLICAN . The best.
Republicans Lead the Best-Run States in America, - Top 5 States: -/ Democrats Dominate the Worst Top 5 States:
North Dakota Republicans Control Best Run States in America, 24/7 Wall St. Survey Shows
Governor: Jack Dalrymple, Republican / State Senate: Republican control / State House of Representatives: Republican control
> Debt per capita: $3,282 (22nd lowest) - > Budget deficit: None - > Unemployment: 3.5% (the lowest)
> Median household income: $51,704 (20th highest) - > Pct. below poverty line: 12.2% (13th lowest)
.................................................................
Republicans Control Wyoming
Governor: Matt Mead, Republican - State Senate: Republican control -State House of Representatives: Republican control
> Debt per capita: $2,694 (18th lowest) -> Budget deficit: 10.3% (32nd largest)
> Unemployment: 6.0% (7th lowest) - > Median household income: $56,322 (13th highest)
.................................................................
Republicans Control Nebraska
Governor: Dave Heineman, Republican - State Legislature: Republican control
> Debt per capita: $1,279 (2nd lowest) - > Budget deficit: 9.7% (34th largest)
> Unemployment: 4.4% (2nd lowest) - > Median household income: $50,296 (22nd highest)
> Pct. below poverty line: 13.1% (tied-15th lowest)
.................................................................
Republicans Control Utah
Governor: Gary Herbert, Republican - State Senate: Republican control
State House of Representatives: Republican control - > Debt per capita: $2,356 (15th lowest)
> Budget deficit: 14.7% (25th largest) - > Unemployment: 6.7% (tied-11th lowest)
> Median household income: $55,869 (14th highest) - > Pct. below poverty line: 13.5% (tied-17th lowest)
.................................................................
Republicans Control Iowa
Governor: Terry Branstad, Republican - State Senate: Republican control
State House of Representatives: Republican control - > Debt per capita: $1,690 (7th lowest)
> Budget deficit: 20.3% (18th largest) - > Unemployment: 5.9% (6th lowest)
> Median household income: $49,427 (24th highest) - > Pct. below poverty line: 12.8% (14th lowest).
thank God that liberal democrats will be removed from the white house. Soon.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?