CDZ Can you vote democrat and support the 2nd Amendment?

[Humorme]

So...if there happened to be a whole lot of Democrats (and Republicans) that supported the 2nd Amendment then it would just become a "non-issue". Like neither party is interested in debating the 19th amendment because there is general agreement on it as Americans.

The NRA, together with its coterie of sycophants, has managed to weaponize guns into a cult, not a culture.
In a cult, one is not allowed to have their own views. A Scientologist is not allowed to doubt parts of L. Ron Hubbard's writings or question the actions of David Miscavige.
Watch what happens when any NRA supporters detect someone who doesn't eat the whole enchilada.

See? It's a cult.

As if the NRA determines what gun owners want and don't want. The NRA does not speak for me.

Let me make it plain and clear:

I have a Right to Life. Inherent in that Right to Life is the Duty and the Obligation to preserve, defend, and protect that Life in the manner I see fit. Amazingly, early courts agreed with that presupposition AND our courts have said that law enforcement has NO duty to protect the individual. That is YOUR individual responsibility.

All laws aside if anyone of you felt threatened and / or you thought a loved one was in imminent danger, most of you would react instinctively to protect a loved one - laws or not.

People can try and argue against the plain truth, but our forefathers were adamant about this issue. And, with or without the law, I. like millions of others, will not forfeit my Liberty based upon the decision of masses trying to tell us what our lives are worth.

 

[Alexanderful]

In my mind the answer is definitely YES...but it probably would mean that you are more concerned about other issues. I think one of the biggest problems with our political thinking today is that there are only two flavors of people: Liberals and Conservatives and they belong to the Democrat and Republican parties respectively. In reality, people *should* fall all along a spectrum of liberal/conservative values and it would be issue-dependent...unless they have been brainwashed into thinking that they have to agree with the ENTIRE party platform. What does a person's viewpoint on gun control have to do with their viewpoint on the best healthcare system or abortion? I can't see a completely coherent connection. But, each party had to divide up all the issues people disagree on and take a side.

So...if there happened to be a whole lot of Democrats (and Republicans) that supported the 2nd Amendment then it would just become a "non-issue". Like neither party is interested in debating the 19th amendment because there is general agreement on it as Americans.

You didn't make it clear who you were responding to.

Sorry I was answering the original question of the post.

 

[Alexanderful]

So...if there happened to be a whole lot of Democrats (and Republicans) that supported the 2nd Amendment then it would just become a "non-issue". Like neither party is interested in debating the 19th amendment because there is general agreement on it as Americans.

The NRA, together with its coterie of sycophants, has managed to weaponize guns into a cult, not a culture.
In a cult, one is not allowed to have their own views. A Scientologist is not allowed to doubt parts of L. Ron Hubbard's writings or question the actions of David Miscavige.
Watch what happens when any NRA supporters detect someone who doesn't eat the whole enchilada.

See? It's a cult.

Pretty decent point. I agree that if you say you are an NRA supporter but then say maybe you would be OK with nearly any kind of gun regulation whatsoever then the herd will turn on you quickly. The NRA (as an organization) is very purest in their belief and even if you are searching for a middle ground you are lumped in with the "enemy". Sadly, if the NRA is a cult than there are many cults operating out there and I think people should never give up their own intellectual process and lazily accept one pre-packaged from someone else's agenda.

 

[Checkerboard Strangler]

So...if there happened to be a whole lot of Democrats (and Republicans) that supported the 2nd Amendment then it would just become a "non-issue". Like neither party is interested in debating the 19th amendment because there is general agreement on it as Americans.

The NRA, together with its coterie of sycophants, has managed to weaponize guns into a cult, not a culture.
In a cult, one is not allowed to have their own views. A Scientologist is not allowed to doubt parts of L. Ron Hubbard's writings or question the actions of David Miscavige.
Watch what happens when any NRA supporters detect someone who doesn't eat the whole enchilada.

See? It's a cult.

Pretty decent point. I agree that if you say you are an NRA supporter but then say maybe you would be OK with nearly any kind of gun regulation whatsoever then the herd will turn on you quickly. The NRA (as an organization) is very purest in their belief and even if you are searching for a middle ground you are lumped in with the "enemy". Sadly, if the NRA is a cult than there are many cults operating out there and I think people should never give up their own intellectual process and lazily accept one pre-packaged from someone else's agenda.

I used to BE an NRA member, but it was back when they were more of a GUN SAFETY organization.
But the problem isn't if you say you "would be OK with nearly any kind of gun regulation whatsoever".
The problem is if you say you are okay WITH ANY KIND of regulation AT ALL.

Cult mentality springs forth from fundamentalist mindsets, which spring forth from institutionalized and sanctioned ignorance. I've tried to take stock of both and both are in plentiful supply in this nation in the last 25 years.

 

[emilynghiem]

There is a gun group that goes by the name "The Liberal Gun Group." They support left wing agendas and causes...including supporting hilary clinton for President. They also came together to support the Right to Keep and Bear Arms. Is it possible to vote for democrats and expect to keep the 2nd Amendment?

Sure 2aguy
If gay conservatives can be Republicans,
liberal gun rights advocates can be Democrats.

There is also lobby for prolife Democrats who check legislation
and align with the right, so if it is too biased toward abortion,
these prolife Democrats lobby govt officials and legislators
and try to straighten the wheels from swerving too far to the left.

As for gun rights, there was even an LGBT group that came
out in support of guns instead of more regulations or restrictions.

The Democrats are SUPPOSED to embrace and include diversity.
Why not diversity of political beliefs?

 

[Skull Pilot]

I for one do not think nonviolent crimes and especially victim-less crimes warrant prison time for the most part

Prison should be reserved for violent pieces of shit who do not belong on the streets

The reality is we are taking mentally unstable people off the streets and, instead of sending them to places for help, we send them to jail and prison. There, they become worse and ultimately put back onto the streets.

With no job, no education, no skill sets, no support system AND a criminal record, they become recidivists, drug dealers, junkies, criminals, and many commit violent acts.

You can either fix the problem or support tyranny on the installment plan.

We fix the problem by putting violent pieces of shit away for a long time.

I don't believe we should reward bad choices. I'll endorse sending anyone under the age of 30 who commits any crime but a crime of violence for a mandatory 6 year military hitch. They can learn a trade while actually providing a service.

There is a reason we no longer rely on the general population to offer up potential solutions.

Most of the people we're talking about have ADD / ADHD, autism, drug dependencies, and many suffer from schizophrenia, depression, anxiety, hallucinations, delusional behavior, and worse.

I don't think that putting those people into the military OR prison is a solution to anything. I do, however think, that rehabilitation followed up by appropriate treatments will save us money and lives in the long run.

Quantify most.

What possible difference does that make? Once you eliminate the sociopaths, psychopaths, criminally insane, along with those with ADD / ADHD, autism, drug dependencies, schizophrenia, depression, anxiety, hallucinations, delusional behavior; once you take out those on SSRIs and the political jihadists... you don't have much of a base left that will potentially harm their fellow man.

And it does matter. Is most to you 10%, 40%, 51% or 99% and give me a real number not just your opinion

But I see you're just another one of those "Its not their fault" people.

Tell me why is it that the US has the most ADHD diagnoses? It's a made up "disease". Drug dependency is a choice like all addictions and not a "disease".

 

[rightwinger]

Bans of large capacity magazines
Background checks
Registration


All comply with the second amendment

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Which shows it isn't gun ownership that drives the crime rate...it is the culture....and, by the way, their crime rate is going up as they imported more immigrants from countries that do not share German culture.....

Exactly my point. If you have a culture of only giving guns to people who are responsible, you won't have crime rate we have.

If you tell eveyrone they have a God given right to a gun, with no training or competency, well, you'll get pretty much what we have 33,000 gun deaths a year.

So you're saying we should teach gun safety at school? Great idea!

 

[rightwinger]

Which shows it isn't gun ownership that drives the crime rate...it is the culture....and, by the way, their crime rate is going up as they imported more immigrants from countries that do not share German culture.....

Exactly my point. If you have a culture of only giving guns to people who are responsible, you won't have crime rate we have.

If you tell eveyrone they have a God given right to a gun, with no training or competency, well, you'll get pretty much what we have 33,000 gun deaths a year.

So you're saying we should teach gun safety at school? Great idea!

Especially in urban areas

 

[Humorme]

Bans of large capacity magazines
Background checks
Registration


All comply with the second amendment

No, such does NOT comply with the Second Amendment

 

[rightwinger]

Bans of large capacity magazines
Background checks
Registration


All comply with the second amendment

No, such does NOT comply with the Second Amendment

Look ...

Everyone knows a well regulated militia is necessary to the security of a free state
You can't have a well regulated militia without knowing who has guns and what their background is

 

[Skull Pilot]

Bans of large capacity magazines
Background checks
Registration


All comply with the second amendment

There is no reason to ban any semiautomatic rifle or any magazine

And there is absolutely no need for registration unless of course you want registration in order to practice any of your protected constitutional rights.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Bans of large capacity magazines
Background checks
Registration


All comply with the second amendment

No, such does NOT comply with the Second Amendment

Look ...

Everyone knows a well regulated militia is necessary to the security of a free state
You can't have a well regulated militia without knowing who has guns and what their background is

Of course you can

 

[Humorme]

The reality is we are taking mentally unstable people off the streets and, instead of sending them to places for help, we send them to jail and prison. There, they become worse and ultimately put back onto the streets.

With no job, no education, no skill sets, no support system AND a criminal record, they become recidivists, drug dealers, junkies, criminals, and many commit violent acts.

You can either fix the problem or support tyranny on the installment plan.

We fix the problem by putting violent pieces of shit away for a long time.

I don't believe we should reward bad choices. I'll endorse sending anyone under the age of 30 who commits any crime but a crime of violence for a mandatory 6 year military hitch. They can learn a trade while actually providing a service.

There is a reason we no longer rely on the general population to offer up potential solutions.

Most of the people we're talking about have ADD / ADHD, autism, drug dependencies, and many suffer from schizophrenia, depression, anxiety, hallucinations, delusional behavior, and worse.

I don't think that putting those people into the military OR prison is a solution to anything. I do, however think, that rehabilitation followed up by appropriate treatments will save us money and lives in the long run.

Quantify most.

What possible difference does that make? Once you eliminate the sociopaths, psychopaths, criminally insane, along with those with ADD / ADHD, autism, drug dependencies, schizophrenia, depression, anxiety, hallucinations, delusional behavior; once you take out those on SSRIs and the political jihadists... you don't have much of a base left that will potentially harm their fellow man.

And it does matter. Is most to you 10%, 40%, 51% or 99% and give me a real number not just your opinion

But I see you're just another one of those "Its not their fault" people.

Tell me why is it that the US has the most ADHD diagnoses? It's a made up "disease". Drug dependency is a choice like all addictions and not a "disease".

ADD and ADHD are not diseases. They are issues where the parents feed their children junk food and keep them housed where they don't get the requisite sunshine and exercise.

You ask me questions and then presume to categorize me into a category that I'm probably not a part of. What's up with that?

An older study put the problem of prisoners into perspective:

"Of the 2.3 million inmates crowding our nations prisons and jails, 1.5 million meet the DSM-IV medical criteria for substance abuse or addiction, and another 458,000, while not meeting the strict DSM-IV criteria, had histories of substance abuse; were under the influence of alcohol or other drugs at the time of their crime; committed their offense to get money to buy drugs; were incarcerated for an alcohol or drug law violation; or shared some combination of these characteristics, according to Behind Bars II: Substance Abuse and America’s Prison Population. Combined these two groups constitute 85% of the U.S. prison population."

New CASA* Report Finds: 65% of All U.S. Inmates Meet Medical Criteria for Substance Abuse Addiction, Only 11% Receive Any Treatment

With respect to mass shooters virtually ALL of them are on a schedule of drugs called SSRIs and / or political jihadists.

All told, between those who were influenced by "legal" drugs, illegal drugs, alcohol, and political extremism approximately 88 percent of gun violence is related and a factor to that.

You want to paint as some category of people, but my forefathers warned me about people like you - those who would sell out my Liberty on the installment plan:

“But a constitution of government once changed from freedom can never be restored. Liberty, once lost, is lost forever.

...Arms in the hands of individual citizens may be used at individual discretion for the defence of the country, the over-throw of tyranny, or in private self-defense.” John Adams

"Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are inevitably ruined." Patrick Henry

You can argue with people and the medical community, but when people screw up and we get involved (via the legal process) we should not send people back into society that could pose a danger and you can't fix everything with a long prison sentence. If you could, the recidivism rate would not be over 65 percent in every jurisdiction in America.

In the case of mass shooters, if we got the doctors away from the notion that everybody needs some freaking mind altering drug - and IF they do, the doctor is to be held accountable for his patients while on these drugs, it would go a long way into reducing gun violence across the board.

I could say much more, but while you may like the idea of a government so big it can give you what you want, you forget the old proverbial counter: The government that can give you all you want is big enough to take all you have.

 

[rightwinger]

Bans of large capacity magazines
Background checks
Registration


All comply with the second amendment

No, such does NOT comply with the Second Amendment

Look ...

Everyone knows a well regulated militia is necessary to the security of a free state
You can't have a well regulated militia without knowing who has guns and what their background is

Of course you can

You obviously have no concept of well regulated

 

[Humorme]

Bans of large capacity magazines
Background checks
Registration


All comply with the second amendment

No, such does NOT comply with the Second Amendment

Look ...

Everyone knows a well regulated militia is necessary to the security of a free state
You can't have a well regulated militia without knowing who has guns and what their background is

That is a separate issue. The United States Supreme Court HELD:

"The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home." Pp. 2–53

District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008)

Do you need me to explain what a holding is?

 

[Humorme]

Bans of large capacity magazines
Background checks
Registration


All comply with the second amendment

No, such does NOT comply with the Second Amendment

Look ...

Everyone knows a well regulated militia is necessary to the security of a free state
You can't have a well regulated militia without knowing who has guns and what their background is

Of course you can

You obviously have no concept of well regulated

Actually, YOU don't seem to understand what the founders meant by well regulated - which applies to the militia, NOT the people NOR the Rights they already had before the ratification of the Constitution.

 

[rightwinger]

Bans of large capacity magazines
Background checks
Registration


All comply with the second amendment

No, such does NOT comply with the Second Amendment

Look ...

Everyone knows a well regulated militia is necessary to the security of a free state
You can't have a well regulated militia without knowing who has guns and what their background is

That is a separate issue. The United States Supreme Court HELD:

"The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home." Pp. 2–53

District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008)

Do you need me to explain what a holding is?

Which does nothing to preclude a society ensuring they know who has guns because it is necessary to the security of a free state. If the British invade us, we need to know who has guns so we can say....The British are coming, the British are coming....to arms...to arms

Heller also acknowledges the rights of the government to restrict guns

 

[Humorme]

Bans of large capacity magazines
Background checks
Registration


All comply with the second amendment

No, such does NOT comply with the Second Amendment

Look ...

Everyone knows a well regulated militia is necessary to the security of a free state
You can't have a well regulated militia without knowing who has guns and what their background is

That is a separate issue. The United States Supreme Court HELD:

"The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home." Pp. 2–53

District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008)

Do you need me to explain what a holding is?

Which does nothing to preclude a society ensuring they know who has guns because it is necessary to the security of a free state. If the British invade us, we need to know who has guns so we can say....The British are coming, the British are coming....to arms...to arms

Heller also acknowledges the rights of the government to restrict guns

There is good and bad in Heller. The important thing to note is that America currently has two separate and distinct governments:

1) The Constitutional (legal / de jure) Republic as guaranteed In Article IV Section 4 of the Constitution

2) The Federal - Legislative Democracy (an illegal / de facto government) owned and controlled by elite multinational corporations

The Second Amendment as originally written and intended, according to the founding fathers:

“The Constitution shall never be construed to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms.” Samuel Adams

Yet, despite that, you are doing exactly what the founders were in opposition to. In that Heller acknowledges a Right to keep and bear Arms, the part you are talking about is has NOTHING to do with registering firearms, but rather the Court trying to say government has the power to outlaw certain weapons.

On that point, the Court certainly has the power to claim such, but they clearly lack the authority. According to libertylawsite:

"To the framers, the only real way to prevent government from violating the liberty of its citizens was to give those citizens the capacity to control government."

The Constitution's Structural Limitations on Power Should Be the Focus of the Bill of Rights - Online Library of Law & Liberty

It appears to me that you are advocating for just the opposite of what the laws intended.

 

[Skull Pilot]

We fix the problem by putting violent pieces of shit away for a long time.

I don't believe we should reward bad choices. I'll endorse sending anyone under the age of 30 who commits any crime but a crime of violence for a mandatory 6 year military hitch. They can learn a trade while actually providing a service.

There is a reason we no longer rely on the general population to offer up potential solutions.

Most of the people we're talking about have ADD / ADHD, autism, drug dependencies, and many suffer from schizophrenia, depression, anxiety, hallucinations, delusional behavior, and worse.

I don't think that putting those people into the military OR prison is a solution to anything. I do, however think, that rehabilitation followed up by appropriate treatments will save us money and lives in the long run.

Quantify most.

What possible difference does that make? Once you eliminate the sociopaths, psychopaths, criminally insane, along with those with ADD / ADHD, autism, drug dependencies, schizophrenia, depression, anxiety, hallucinations, delusional behavior; once you take out those on SSRIs and the political jihadists... you don't have much of a base left that will potentially harm their fellow man.

And it does matter. Is most to you 10%, 40%, 51% or 99% and give me a real number not just your opinion

But I see you're just another one of those "Its not their fault" people.

Tell me why is it that the US has the most ADHD diagnoses? It's a made up "disease". Drug dependency is a choice like all addictions and not a "disease".

ADD and ADHD are not diseases. They are issues where the parents feed their children junk food and keep them housed where they don't get the requisite sunshine and exercise.

You ask me questions and then presume to categorize me into a category that I'm probably not a part of. What's up with that?

An older study put the problem of prisoners into perspective:

"Of the 2.3 million inmates crowding our nations prisons and jails, 1.5 million meet the DSM-IV medical criteria for substance abuse or addiction, and another 458,000, while not meeting the strict DSM-IV criteria, had histories of substance abuse; were under the influence of alcohol or other drugs at the time of their crime; committed their offense to get money to buy drugs; were incarcerated for an alcohol or drug law violation; or shared some combination of these characteristics, according to Behind Bars II: Substance Abuse and America’s Prison Population. Combined these two groups constitute 85% of the U.S. prison population."

New CASA* Report Finds: 65% of All U.S. Inmates Meet Medical Criteria for Substance Abuse Addiction, Only 11% Receive Any Treatment

With respect to mass shooters virtually ALL of them are on a schedule of drugs called SSRIs and / or political jihadists.

All told, between those who were influenced by "legal" drugs, illegal drugs, alcohol, and political extremism approximately 88 percent of gun violence is related and a factor to that.

You want to paint as some category of people, but my forefathers warned me about people like you - those who would sell out my Liberty on the installment plan:

“But a constitution of government once changed from freedom can never be restored. Liberty, once lost, is lost forever.

...Arms in the hands of individual citizens may be used at individual discretion for the defence of the country, the over-throw of tyranny, or in private self-defense.” John Adams

"Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are inevitably ruined." Patrick Henry

You can argue with people and the medical community, but when people screw up and we get involved (via the legal process) we should not send people back into society that could pose a danger and you can't fix everything with a long prison sentence. If you could, the recidivism rate would not be over 65 percent in every jurisdiction in America.

In the case of mass shooters, if we got the doctors away from the notion that everybody needs some freaking mind altering drug - and IF they do, the doctor is to be held accountable for his patients while on these drugs, it would go a long way into reducing gun violence across the board.

I could say much more, but while you may like the idea of a government so big it can give you what you want, you forget the old proverbial counter: The government that can give you all you want is big enough to take all you have.

And I already told you that we waste too much prison space on nonviolent offenders and those who commit victim-less crimes.

Prison should be reserved for violent offenders