• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's 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!

There is no 2A debate! We have them. We won't surrender them. Your move!

TurtleDude said:
there is no support for the collectivist nonsense that did not appear until over 100 years after the second amendment was ratified. Even more importantly, there is absolutely no suggestion-in any of Article One, Section 8, that the federal government had any power over restricting what private citizens could own or acquire
Click to expand...
Okay. If all I'm going to get back from you is shit like "collectivist nonsense," we're through here. I had the idea you were better than that. Must have confused you with someone else.
 
MaryP said:
Okay. If all I'm going to get back from you is shit like "collectivist nonsense," we're through here. I had the idea you were better than that. Must have confused you with someone else.
Click to expand...
tell us-what empowers the federal government-properly-to restrict gun ownership? You never did answer some of my rather pertinent questions
 
TurtleDude said:
tell us-what empowers the federal government-properly-to restrict gun ownership? You never did answer some of my rather pertinent questions
Click to expand...
TurtleDude said:
tell us-what empowers the federal government-properly-to restrict gun ownership? You never did answer some of my rather pertinent questions
Click to expand...
What part of "we're done here" are you struggling with? I'll be damned if I'm going to spend the time giving you a real response when all I'm going to get is some trite dismissal. Sorry. You blew it.
 
MaryP said:
What part of "we're done here" are you struggling with? I'll be damned if I'm going to spend the time giving you a real response when all I'm going to get is some trite dismissal. Sorry. You blew it.
Click to expand...
One of the major failings of the anti gun advocates is that they try to pretend that the second amendment is not a complete and negative restriction on the federal government. Some , dishonestly claim, that banning all sorts of firearms really does not rise to "infringe"/ but the gun banners have never ever been able to honestly point to anything in the constitution that empowers the federal government. FDR knew that and he and his minions spent weeks trying to conjure up some sort of "latent power".
 
MaryP said:
Let's talk about that right. The founders had recently fought a seven year war with a tyrannical government and won. It was on their minds that the need might happen again. Hence the Second Amendment. Let's fast forward to 2020. Your handguns and AR'S cannot win against the weaponry of the US military and it would be foolish to think so.

The Second Amendment no longer has a purpose. God did NOT give every Tom Fool Dick and Harry in this country the right to own a gun. Our radical founding fathers did. The purpose has long been antiquated. Do not talk to me about the right to own a gun as if it's something holy and immutable. 2A is like Queen Elizabeth's hats--a living anachronism.

Every other sane, civilized country limits gun ownership and has far fewer gun homicides. I want some of that.
Click to expand...

And if you want to live under that govt. or another like it no ones keeping you. You have yourself deluded that the US military will go after American citizens.
IF "The Second Amendment no longer has a purpose" (your words not mine) would it be too far fetched to assume you feel the same about the other 9 of our rights?
 
MaryP said:
Less weapons would mean less to be stolen or illegally sold.
Click to expand...

Yet, you have no proposal that won't impact law abiding citizens more than anyone else. I bet you are against mandatory sentencing for gun related crimes aren't you?
 
vegas giants said:
By the way......you have no solutions either.

We have proven solutions
Click to expand...

If by proven, you mean blanket bans, you do. They aren't acceptable solutions. Nice dodge. Try something realistic this time, oh wait, look who I am replying to, realistic solutions aren't even in the wheelhouse.
 
OpportunityCost said:
If by proven, you mean blanket bans, you do. They aren't acceptable solutions. Nice dodge. Try something realistic this time, oh wait, look who I am replying to, realistic solutions aren't even in the wheelhouse.
Click to expand...
As I said.....you have nothing
 
zsu2357 said:
In your response to Opportunity, you said "no solutions either," meaning you don't have one.

But yet you claim to "have proven ones."
Click to expand...
The grammar police have arrived!!!!! Lol
 
zsu2357 said:
And if you want to live under that govt. or another like it no ones keeping you. You have yourself deluded that the US military will go after American citizens.
Click to expand...
I'm not going anywhere. Please see the Civil War if you think US soldiers would not move against fellow Americans. If it is attacked, the military will respond.
zsu2357 said:
IF "The Second Amendment no longer has a purpose" (your words not mine) would it be too far fetched to assume you feel the same about the other 9 of our rights?
Click to expand...
Yes, it would be too far fetched. I already explained why the Second no longer applies. Do YOU see any others that now address an impossible scenario?
 
OpportunityCost said:
Yet, you have no proposal that won't impact law abiding citizens more than anyone else. I bet you are against mandatory sentencing for gun related crimes aren't you?
Click to expand...
No. I support that.
 
MaryP said:
I never heard of people going after hunters and gun ranges. And if gun control had something to do with Gore and Hillary losing, times have changed. It is no longer a poison pill to talk about another ban on military style weapons in the hands of civilians. Background checks may keep a few folks from purchasing weapons, but it doesn't do squat to get illegal guns off the street. The only way to do that is to have seriously less guns in this country floating around to be stolen or sold illegally. Make ammunition cost prohibitive and make new gun owners pass a gun safety course first, along with a psych. eval and make it necessary to go through it again every seven years for renewal. Anyone carrying an unlicensed weapon gets hit with a $100,000 fine. No more dumb ass Joe Schmoe walking into Cabelas to buy an AR or a handgun just because he feels like a tough guy that day. It will eventually cut down on the number of guns in this country and that will very obviously lead to many less homicides by gun.

You want to keep your guns? Fine. Earn it.
Click to expand...
I guess you haven't been watching what happened in Virginia just with Covid. They weren't making impossible for gun ranges to function under the rules. One range went to court and won. It didn't affect anyone else, this was early on.
 
MaryP said:
I'm not going anywhere. Please see the Civil War if you think US soldiers would not move against fellow Americans. If it is attacked, the military will respond.

Yes, it would be too far fetched. I already explained why the Second no longer applies. Do YOU see any others that now address an impossible scenario?
Click to expand...
Guess what, you don't get to decide what applies. Only an amendment can do that.
 
American said:
Guess what, you don't get to decide what applies. Only an amendment can do that.
Click to expand...
I thought we were offering our opinions here.
 
vegas giants said:
Ok than this can be done for any gun. Lol


Because it's not a ban. Lol
Click to expand...
no it can't. the supreme court has already ruled on it.


Only certain types of FFL/SOTs may make them, and then only for purchase by qualified state and federal agencies. There are no exceptions
Click to expand...
yes, thank you for showing again that your claim was false.
 
aociswundumho said:
We have a mixed economy. The areas where the rotten state controls the means of production and distribution are by definition socialist.
Click to expand...
the state does not control the means of production or distribution.


If the government made it so you had to pay $100 in order to cast a ballot in an election, would you consider that to be an infringement on your right to vote?
Click to expand...
poll taxes are illegal
 
rahl said:
no it can't. the supreme court has already ruled on it.



yes, thank you for showing again that your claim was false.
Click to expand...
No it hasnt. If it can he done for fully auto weapons then it can he done for other guns


Remember....he said it's not a ban
 
rahl said:
no it can't. the supreme court has already ruled on it.



yes, thank you for showing again that your claim was false.
Click to expand...
I accept your concession
 
vegas giants said:
No it hasnt. If it can he done for fully auto weapons then it can he done for other guns
Click to expand...
of course they have. DC v Heller.


Remember....he said it's not a ban
Click to expand...
remember, vegas has no ****ing idea what he's talking about, and has been completely refuted.
 
rahl said:
of course they have. DC v Heller.



remember, vegas has no ****ing idea what he's talking about, and has been completely refuted.
Click to expand...
Your concession has already been accepted. You dont understand the law and make up terms. Sorry
 
rahl said:
lol, you're a pathetic troll. I directly refuted you claim. Sorry.
Click to expand...


Its on buddy. Just remember that if this is applied to guns it's not a ban


Only certain types of FFL/SOTs may make them, and then only for purchase by qualified state and federal agencies. There are no exceptions


HAHAHAHAHA
 
vegas giants said:
Your concession has already been accepted. You dont understand the law and make up terms. Sorry
Click to expand...
I literally cited the law showing you they aren't banned, lol.
 
vegas giants said:
Its on buddy. Just remember that if this is applied to guns it's not a ban


Only certain types of FFL/SOTs may make them, and then only for purchase by qualified state and federal agencies. There are no exceptions


HAHAHAHAHA
Click to expand...
yes, thank you for again conceding that your claim was proven false.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom