Why Gun Nuts Lie - I Know From Experience[W:516:1716:2243]

[danielpalos]

Re: Why Gun Nuts Lie - I Know From Experience[W:516]

before the 17th, the state senators were representatives for their state government, and senators had to vote according to how their state government told him to vote.

states protected their state powers this way by controlling the senate.

The increased "bureaucracy" of term limits, would no longer be an issue.

 

[Master PO]

Re: Why Gun Nuts Lie - I Know From Experience[W:516]

The increased "bureaucracy" of term limits, would no longer be an issue.

i have looked at records of senators for states when they were appointed by their state goverments and they never get more then two terms, after there direct election by the people senators start serving several terms,making the job a career

 

[Celebrity]

Re: Why Gun Nuts Lie - I Know From Experience[W:516]

almost all the lies comes from the Bannerrhoid movement. the lies are based on the claims that public safety is the main motivation from that movement when that is clearly false

It's not clear that it is false, and it's not clear that pro gun control rhetoric is a lie - as asserted by some gun obsessed individual in this thread.

 

[TurtleDude]

Re: Why Gun Nuts Lie - I Know From Experience[W:516]

It's not clear that it is false, and it's not clear that pro gun control rhetoric is a lie - as asserted by some gun obsessed individual in this thread.

sure it is.

i do believe that some low information voters actually believe the crap that the BM pushes really will control crime. But they aren't on this board and they rarely engage in political debate. That's why they are low information voters. All you have to do is watch the posts of the anti gun posters. Sooner or later you will see that their real hatred is for conservative pro-rights voters and the NRA, not for violent criminals.

and they continue to push crap. Felons cannot own any guns so when BMMs say that we need to ban honest people from owning stuff so criminals won't get them that shows weak thinking. The proper approach is to add on additional time for a felon that uses an assault weapon (WTF is that anyway) to commit a crime. Not telling people who never committed crimes they cannot own them

BMMs think that the second amendment was intended to be "limited"

that demonstrates a complete lack of understanding of constitutional rights

 

[Celebrity]

Re: Why Gun Nuts Lie - I Know From Experience[W:516]

sure it is.

i do believe that some low information voters actually believe the crap that the BM pushes really will control crime. But they aren't on this board and they rarely engage in political debate. That's why they are low information voters. All you have to do is watch the posts of the anti gun posters. Sooner or later you will see that their real hatred is for conservative pro-rights voters and the NRA, not for violent criminals.

and they continue to push crap. Felons cannot own any guns so when BMMs say that we need to ban honest people from owning stuff so criminals won't get them that shows weak thinking. The proper approach is to add on additional time for a felon that uses an assault weapon (WTF is that anyway) to commit a crime. Not telling people who never committed crimes they cannot own them

BMMs think that the second amendment was intended to be "limited"

that demonstrates a complete lack of understanding of constitutional rights

When there's no cards left to play, gun obsessed individuals play the victim card and run the used up "honest people" line. But gun owners are not always victims. They are alive and they have their rights. By the way, I was under the impression that someone who has had a felony conviction can own a gun, including violent aggressors of sexual assault:

In recommending "relief," the ATF special agent noted that "although the applicant's conviction...is a crime of violence, no use of a weapon was involved in this incident. According to the applicant, the sexual behavior involved in this incident was similar to previously acceptable behavior. There is no question that the applicant is guilty of this crime however, based upon this investigation, the applicant is not a violent person."

NRA Expands the Program to Include Gun Criminals
For 20 years, however, felons convicted of crimes "involving the use of a firearm or other weapon" or of violations of federal firearm laws were ineligible to apply for "relief." This changed in 1986, when a law backed by the National Rifle Association took effect. The Firearm Owners' Protection Act (also known as FOPA or McClure/Volkmer for the bills' Senate and House sponsors) expanded the program to allow felons convicted of gun crimes to obtain "relief." And gun criminals certainly took advantage of the program. Of the 100 sample cases obtained by the Violence Policy Center, eight were for firearm violations, including two convictions for illegal sales of machine guns.

In no way am I trying to justify violence, or violation of federal firearm laws. I realize that gun owners, or people who unlawfully possess a firearm are probably more likely to be in violation of federal statute. Gun control is not necessarily about banning guns, so why do we give violent criminals guns? The real victims aren't the ones who made people suffer and fear for their lives.

 

[countryboy]

Re: Why Gun Nuts Lie - I Know From Experience[W:516]

When there's no cards left to play, gun obsessed individuals play the victim card and run the used up "honest people" line. But gun owners are not always victims. They are alive and they have their rights. By the way, I was under the impression that someone who has had a felony conviction can own a gun, including violent aggressors of sexual assault:




In no way am I trying to justify violence, or violation of federal firearm laws. I realize that gun owners, or people who unlawfully possess a firearm are probably more likely to be in violation of federal statute. Gun control is not necessarily about banning guns, so why do we give violent criminals guns? The real victims aren't the ones who made people suffer and fear for their lives.

We give violent criminals guns?

 

[blackjack50]

Re: Why Gun Nuts Lie - I Know From Experience[W:516]

Please quote the 2A correctly. state is the correct version and it has nothing to do with State. What next people will think some power is given to the State. We must learn to be pedantic and not allow the charlatans and propagandists leverage by changing thoughts and ideas.

I'm confused by that statement.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Master PO]

Re: Why Gun Nuts Lie - I Know From Experience[W:516]

When there's no cards left to play, gun obsessed individuals play the victim card and run the used up "honest people" line. But gun owners are not always victims. They are alive and they have their rights. By the way, I was under the impression that someone who has had a felony conviction can own a gun, including violent aggressors of sexual assault:




In no way am I trying to justify violence, or violation of federal firearm laws. I realize that gun owners, or people who unlawfully possess a firearm are probably more likely to be in violation of federal statute. Gun control is not necessarily about banning guns, so why do we give violent criminals guns? The real victims aren't the ones who made people suffer and fear for their lives.

If someone is a criminal per the law by violent action they cannot own firearms, these laws already exist

 

[blackjack50]

Re: Why Gun Nuts Lie - I Know From Experience[W:516]

The People are the Militia. Can you cite where it says, the unorganized militia is necessary for Any Thing?

"The right of the people to keep and bear arms."

There is no arguing with you. You obviously are just being intentionally difficult because you know that your argument has been crushed.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[TurtleDude]

Re: Why Gun Nuts Lie - I Know From Experience[W:516]

We give violent criminals guns?

The anti gun movement is based on lies. that is one of them-unless they are talking about the mexican drug cartels and the Obama Administration

 

[Master PO]

Re: Why Gun Nuts Lie - I Know From Experience[W:516]

The People are the Militia. Can you cite where it says, the unorganized militia is necessary for Any Thing?

The 2nd amendment is in two parts

1 the federal goverment cannot make any law concerning a militia under the authority of a state,
2 the federal goverment cannot make any law concerning the people bearing firearms

 

[Celebrity]

Re: Why Gun Nuts Lie - I Know From Experience[W:516]

We give violent criminals guns?

I don't know, but I Googled: can a felon own a gun, and this came up.

The anti gun movement is based on lies. that is one of them-unless they are talking about the mexican drug cartels and the Obama Administration

That's purely the anti anti gun movement's version of argumentum ad lapidem. What do you have to say about FOPA? Is that also a lie?

 

[Celebrity]

Re: Why Gun Nuts Lie - I Know From Experience[W:516]

The 2nd amendment is in two parts

1 the federal goverment cannot make any law concerning a militia under the authority of a state,
2 the federal goverment cannot make any law concerning the people bearing firearms

No... The federal government cannot make any law of that nature because it is not among the powers given to it in Article One.

The state government can make laws concerning the people bearing firearms as long as that law does not infringe on our right to keep and bear arms.

The only way that I could imagine that the Second Amendment could be interpreted the way you have described would be if it were actually a list, like you wrote in your post. It's not a list, it's a sentence. Grammatically speaking, I believe the militia is a very good example of the people exercising their Second Amendment right. However, the Second Amendment does not in any way prohibit the federal government from passing legislation on a state militia. I think it's perfectly clear that is due to Article 1, and not the Second Amendment.

 

[countryboy]

Re: Why Gun Nuts Lie - I Know From Experience[W:516]

I don't know, but I Googled: can a felon own a gun, and this came up.

What do you mean, you don't know? You said it.

 

[danielpalos]

Re: Why Gun Nuts Lie - I Know From Experience[W:516]

"The right of the people to keep and bear arms."

There is no arguing with you. You obviously are just being intentionally difficult because you know that your argument has been crushed.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Nothing but right wing fantasy?

"I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people, except for a few public officials."
— George Mason, in Debates in Virginia Convention on
Ratification of the Constitution, Elliot, Vol. 3, June 16, 1788

Well regulated militia are necessary to the security of a free State.

 

[Master PO]

Re: Why Gun Nuts Lie - I Know From Experience[W:516]

No... The federal government cannot make any law of that nature because it is not among the powers given to it in Article One.

The state government can make laws concerning the people bearing firearms as long as that law does not infringe on our right to keep and bear arms.

The only way that I could imagine that the Second Amendment could be interpreted the way you have described would be if it were actually a list, like you wrote in your post. It's not a list, it's a sentence. Grammatically speaking, I believe the militia is a very good example of the people exercising their Second Amendment right. However, the Second Amendment does not in any way prohibit the federal government from passing legislation on a state militia. I think it's perfectly clear that is due to Article 1, and not the Second Amendment.

Read the preamble of the bill of rights, the 2nd amendemt is a restiction on federal power..

And remember this ...congress shall make no law...from the begining of the BOR

 

[blackjack50]

Re: Why Gun Nuts Lie - I Know From Experience[W:516]

Nothing but right wing fantasy?

Well regulated militia are necessary to the security of a free State.

We are going to try something new with you.

Do you believe that ONLY the militia should be allowed to own guns?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[matchlight]

Re: Why Gun Nuts Lie - I Know From Experience[W:516]

The federal government has no police power over States. DC v. Heller must only apply in federal jurisdictions.

States have inherent power as sovereigns to make laws and policies. This has long been referred to, by the Supreme Court and others, as the "police (as in 'policy,' not the cops) power." The federal government has no such power. It has only the powers the states and their people have seen fit to cede to it in the Constitution.

It is true that Heller, which was decided in 2008, involved a D.C. firearms law and therefore applied only to the federal government. But in 2010, the Court held in McDonald v. Chicago that the individual right to keep and bear arms, guaranteed by the Second Amendment, is fundamental and applies to the states through the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The Second Amendment right as interpreted in Heller therefore applies against both federal and state governments.

McDonald is the Court's most recent "incorporation" decision. The Court, in a long series of decisions starting about 1900, has by now incorporated most parts of the Bill of Rights into the Fourteenth Amendment and applied them to the states. Anyone who wants to learn more about this process can find a very good discussion of it in McDonald.

 

[danielpalos]

Re: Why Gun Nuts Lie - I Know From Experience[W:516]

We are going to try something new with you.

Do you believe that ONLY the militia should be allowed to own guns?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Nothing but right wing fantasy?

"I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people, except for a few public officials."
— George Mason, in Debates in Virginia Convention on
Ratification of the Constitution, Elliot, Vol. 3, June 16, 1788

 

[danielpalos]

Re: Why Gun Nuts Lie - I Know From Experience[W:516]

States have inherent power as sovereigns to make laws and policies. This has long been referred to, by the Supreme Court and others, as the "police (as in 'policy,' not the cops) power." The federal government has no such power. It has only the powers the states and their people have seen fit to cede to it in the Constitution.

It is true that Heller, which was decided in 2008, involved a D.C. firearms law and therefore applied only to the federal government. But in 2010, the Court held in McDonald v. Chicago that the individual right to keep and bear arms, guaranteed by the Second Amendment, is fundamental and applies to the states through the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The Second Amendment right as interpreted in Heller therefore applies against both federal and state governments.

McDonald is the Court's most recent "incorporation" decision. The Court, in a long series of decisions starting about 1900, has by now incorporated most parts of the Bill of Rights into the Fourteenth Amendment and applied them to the states. Anyone who wants to learn more about this process can find a very good discussion of it in McDonald.

Natural rights are recognized and secured in State Constitutions, not our federal Second Amendment.

 

[Master PO]

Re: Why Gun Nuts Lie - I Know From Experience[W:516]

Natural rights are recognized and secured in State Constitutions, not our federal Second Amendment.

incorrect, rights are unwritten law, and reconized by both constitiutons,and secured with postive law.

 

[matchlight]

Re: Why Gun Nuts Lie - I Know From Experience[W:516]

We are going to try something new with you.

Do you believe that ONLY the militia should be allowed to own guns?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I was not surprised to see that your interlocutor dodged that plain question. No doubt he finds Justice Scalia's opinion for the majority in D.C. v. Heller a little inconvenient. That opinion made very clear that the right to keep and bear arms the Second Amendment guarantees is held by individual Americans--the people--and not by organized militias.

 

[CLAX1911]

Re: Why Gun Nuts Lie - I Know From Experience

You are wrong..........If one commits an offense driving a car........even on your own property.........police can write you a ticket.....

That's the law..........Trust me.............That being said.....

Do you want to get back to the gun issue now

No it isn't. Nobody should trust you. You should produce proof for your claims. Show where the law states that traffic code is enforced on private property.

 

[CLAX1911]

Re: Why Gun Nuts Lie - I Know From Experience

I wanna see a cop come on my property and write me a ticket.

He's full of ****. You're smart enough to know when people say "trust me" they have just said a lie. So i won't bore you with that.

 

[CLAX1911]

Re: Why Gun Nuts Lie - I Know From Experience

You can be cited for driving an unlicensed vehicle........no insurance......and being uninspected............And then have to pay a hefty fine......

I haven't even tried......But why don't you try to Google it

That is absolute bull****. No you can't. Traffic code applies to traffic otherwise race cars would have to be registered and farm equipment.

You know **** about this.