A comparison of two Constitutional rights

[logical4u]

Given that we arent discussing your position on guns, it doesn't matter.

We ARE, however, discussing your position that because we restrict free spech, we can also restrict guns.

To that end, I'd appreciate answers to my questions.

Not everything we have as rights are 100%. You can restrict certain aspects of Speech and at the sametime Guns.
There really isnt much else to it.

Yes, yes there is.

Again:
You're arging that because we restrict free spech, we can also restrict guns.
We restrict free speech for specific reasons, established above - the only way your argument works is if the restrictions on guns are for the same reasons.

That is, you cannot argue that because we can restrict right A because of reason B, we can then restrict right Y for reason Z.

To that end, I'd appreciate answers to my questions

As one pundit said: Are we stopping people from speaking, or are we punishing them after they violate the laws (by yelling fire and causing a stampede)? Each person in a crowd has the ability to use "free speech", that ability is not being removed prior to them entering a crowd. Why should arms be any differect? Enforce the laws, and punish those that steal guns, instead of punishing those that own them, legally.

 

[tjvh]

where in the constitution does it say that reasonable regulation of guns is inappropriate.

i'd suggest you actually look at heller which specifically leaves room for such regulation.

and the comparison is a false one as there is no problem with 'voter fraud' except in the fevered imagination of the right.. not to mention that your own people made the mistake of saying they wanted it in order to sway election results.

but that's ok, right?

It says it right in the Second Amendment.

"Shall NOT BE INFRINGED"....do you need help with the bigger words?

The James Madison Research Library and Information Center

peaceable citizens...the early Americans demanded citizens who owned guns to be peaceable citizens. they supported disarming fools and trouble makers

Just because some might have supported disarming people, doesn't mean they had the legal recourse to do so.

 

[M14 Shooter]

It says it right in the Second Amendment.

"Shall NOT BE INFRINGED"....do you need help with the bigger words?

The James Madison Research Library and Information Center

peaceable citizens...the early Americans demanded citizens who owned guns to be peaceable citizens. they supported disarming fools and trouble makers

Just because some might have supported disarming people, doesn't mean they had the legal recourse to do so.

They supported disarming fools and trouble makers AFTER they proved themselves as fools and troublemakers.

 

[logical4u]

oh jesus fucking christ, we have been over this already.
I never claimed they could.

The government can not ban a weapon from the public, It can regulate how you get that weapon, require you to have it stored in a case or with a gun lock. Give you massive amounts of paperwork to get said gun. heller

You literally are to fucking retarded to understand what i am saying.

Are you thast stupid that you don't recall saying this?

The government can restrict guns through regulation

The government cannot restrict the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia.
I just happen to be a part like millions of Americans are a part of the unorganized militia.

Quick question Little Retarded Rebecca, if you're part of the unorganized militia, how can you possibly consider yourself in compliance with the Second Amendment which clearly calls for a "WELL REGULATED MILITIA"?

If you were actually part of the military as you've claimed before, you'd understand that well regulated and unorganized aren't the same thing.

BTW....................the military has full access to full auto weapons. They're called machine guns and they come in all sizes, even 50 caliber. Those weapons (as in full automatic machine guns) were outlawed a while ago. Why aren't you calling for the legalization of those as well?

And...................finally..................I did not realize until a recent newscast that armor piercing bullets are legal to buy and own in this country. My question is..................what do you REALLY need armor piercing bullets, other than to kill people? Deer and other game don't wear armor. Only criminals robbing banks, the police, and military in a war zone need that kind of ammo.

And.......................I think that keeping it out of the hands of the criminals and only allowing it to the military and the police makes sense.

In a country where the "gov't" fails to protect the borders that tolerates
drug cartels moving back and forth across the border
islamic extremists in the country
violent gangs in the city
phsycotic drugs being abused or "unregulated"
people would be WISE to have a weapon that could protect you and your family from any of the above, and if they can afford body armor, you might want some heavy duty ammo.....


Thanks to the current gov't, we ARE living in a war zone. The President, himself, is encouraging class "warfare". His Attorney General, is systematically using "targeted" justice (ignoring some crimes by certain groups of people, while going out of his way to selectively punish people that disagree with the admininstration), and ingoring the violation of laws by government agencies (fast and furious, and other "gun" stings). This current administration will probably have more deaths from gun violence than any previous administration, just because this administration will not enforce the laws against gun crimes committed by economically challenged groups. This administration is also ignoring the violence and crimes against American citizens by foreigners (which will surely encourage them to do more violence). Are you aware that embassies ARE American soil? Are you aware that our overseas embassies have been attacked seven times under this Administration. We are in a war zone and this President is deceiving you into thinking you are secure, when nothing could be further from the truth.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

oh jesus fucking christ, we have been over this already.
I never claimed they could.

The government can not ban a weapon from the public, It can regulate how you get that weapon, require you to have it stored in a case or with a gun lock. Give you massive amounts of paperwork to get said gun. heller

You literally are to fucking retarded to understand what i am saying.

Are you thast stupid that you don't recall saying this?

The government can restrict guns through regulation

The government cannot restrict the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia.
I just happen to be a part like millions of Americans are a part of the unorganized militia.

Quick question Little Retarded Rebecca, if you're part of the unorganized militia, how can you possibly consider yourself in compliance with the Second Amendment which clearly calls for a "WELL REGULATED MILITIA"?

If you were actually part of the military as you've claimed before, you'd understand that well regulated and unorganized aren't the same thing.

BTW....................the military has full access to full auto weapons. They're called machine guns and they come in all sizes, even 50 caliber. Those weapons (as in full automatic machine guns) were outlawed a while ago. Why aren't you calling for the legalization of those as well?

And...................finally..................I did not realize until a recent newscast that armor piercing bullets are legal to buy and own in this country. My question is..................what do you REALLY need armor piercing bullets, other than to kill people? Deer and other game don't wear armor. Only criminals robbing banks, the police, and military in a war zone need that kind of ammo.

And.......................I think that keeping it out of the hands of the criminals and only allowing it to the military and the police makes sense.

Retarded would be, not knowing what well regulated means and applying it to mean something different.
In working order as to be expected, that is what a well regulated militia is and what I am a part of do you understand this retard sea queer?

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

My question is..................what do you REALLY need armor piercing bullets, other than to kill people?

Dear, guns are for killing people!!! Our founders gave us guns so we could kill people. We won the Revolution by killing people with guns.

What did the liberal think guns were for???

See why we have to be 1000% positive a liberal will be slow???? What other conclusion is possible????

 

[ABikerSailor]

My question is..................what do you REALLY need armor piercing bullets, other than to kill people?

Dear, guns are for killing people!!! Our founders gave us guns so we could kill people. We won the Revolution by killing people with guns.

What did the liberal think guns were for???

See why we have to be 1000% positive a liberal will be slow???? What other conclusion is possible????

Quick question Eddie the Blowjob Monkey................what is it we're supposed to defend against?

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

................what is it we're supposed to defend against?

Liberals, you poor poor pathetic ninny!!! We won the Revolution by defending ourselves against monarchist liberals!!


OMG!!!What did you think guns were for????????????????


"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government"

-- Thomas Jefferson, 1 Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334


Can you understand why we're sure liberals are 100% brain dead??? You actually asked, "what are guns good for except killing people."!!! Its true you actually did!!!

Lets try this: can you tell us what water is good for??