Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
No, you attempted to propagate a ridiculous lie.It has to be more than just that.Conceal carry in any state or municipality?
Correct.
UBC for no restrictions at all on anyone who is cleared by a UBC. And I would like to know what the disqualifiers would be in advance and have a limiting clause so they can't add new disqualifiers after the fact.
A discussion to be had, for sure. I just laid out something relatively simple.
I see lefties frequently screech about how 2A supporters refuse to compromise. Well, that's because there's never BEEN a compromise, rather a one-sided chipping away of 2nd Amendment rights with nothing offered in return.
So here, I'll offer an actual compromise. You lefties want universal background checks? I can get behind that. But in exchange I want universal reciprocity on CCW permits.
Deal?
[
And when serious gun legislation is proposed that "bans guns" you let me know.
This is as ignorant as it is idiotic and wrong.Fuck that.
UBC for zero restrictions on all firearms.
If you can pass a UBC, you're safe with a machine gun, right?'
.
I'd be fine with that too. The point I'm making is that none of our existing laws were "compromises". They are one-sided restrictions.
Yes, so the compromise would be that it's THEIR turn to give something up, not us giving anything else.
Exactly.
That means I'm not conceding universal background checks, just FYI.
Understood. But I think you know as well as I do that the left won't volunteer a goddamn thing unless they think they're getting something they want.
And another rightwing ignoramus chimes in with ridiculous lies and a slippery slope fallacy.Registration is the frst step to confiscation. How it happened in other countries. Never negotiate.
UBC for no restrictions at all on anyone who is cleared by a UBC. And I would like to know what the disqualifiers would be in advance and have a limiting clause so they can't add new disqualifiers after the fact.
We're still left with a burden on law-abiding citizens, to prove that they meet some arbitrary qualification, before they are allowed to exercise an essential Constitutional right. This is not acceptable.
The burden needs to be on government, if it wishes to deny such a right to any individual, to prove, through due process of law, that there is something extraordinary about that individual that makes it necessary to prevent that individual from exercising that right. The government needs to prove that the denial of a right is necessary and justifiable, in each individual case where it seeks to deny that right. Anything else is unconstitutional.
Baloney ........your side can't win against the Constitution so you are trying to do it through the back door..........Ammunition..........making laws that will basically do the same thing..........Like the Wankers in Oregon are trying to pass now.....Limits to 5 rounds...............Blow me.No, you attempted to propagate a ridiculous lie.It has to be more than just that.Conceal carry in any state or municipality?
Correct.
UBC for no restrictions at all on anyone who is cleared by a UBC. And I would like to know what the disqualifiers would be in advance and have a limiting clause so they can't add new disqualifiers after the fact.
A discussion to be had, for sure. I just laid out something relatively simple.
Again: there has been no ‘chipping away’ at Second Amendment rights.
The evolution of Second Amendment jurisprudence has in no manner been ‘one-sided.’
Current firearm regulatory measures are perfectly Constitutional and consistent with the Second Amendment – their constitutionality determined solely by the Supreme Court.
You want registration...........then when you get temporary power you will try to do what left tard States are doing now...........Backdoor the LEGAL GUN OWNERS of this country..........Criminals aren't going to give up their guns............And another rightwing ignoramus chimes in with ridiculous lies and a slippery slope fallacy.Registration is the frst step to confiscation. How it happened in other countries. Never negotiate.
Background checks in no manner require ‘registration.’
In jurisdictions with registration no firearms have been ‘confiscated.’
This is as ignorant as it is idiotic and wrong.
Constitutional case law isn’t determined by anyone ‘volunteering’ anything – that’s a naïve, childish, and wrongheaded perception of how the law works.
Lawmaking entities enact firearm regulatory measures; those who oppose those measures may seek to have the laws repealed or are at liberty to challenge the laws in court.
Laws upheld by the courts are determined to be Constitutional and may continue to be enforced – where those who support a measure which has been upheld as Constitutional are not required to ‘give up’ or ‘volunteer’ anything for the continued enforcement of the measure.
If you want concealed carry reciprocity, then advocate for the enactment of such a measure absent whining about ‘liberals’ and lying about their position and intent.
How about this: we get strong gun control, you kids can have your silly wall.I see lefties frequently screech about how 2A supporters refuse to compromise. Well, that's because there's never BEEN a compromise, rather a one-sided chipping away of 2nd Amendment rights with nothing offered in return.
So here, I'll offer an actual compromise. You lefties want universal background checks? I can get behind that. But in exchange I want universal reciprocity on CCW permits.
Deal?
Actually, Congress does have the authority to enact legislation authorizing state reciprocity with regard to concealed carry licenses and permits:I see lefties frequently screech about how 2A supporters refuse to compromise. Well, that's because there's never BEEN a compromise, rather a one-sided chipping away of 2nd Amendment rights with nothing offered in return.
So here, I'll offer an actual compromise. You lefties want universal background checks? I can get behind that. But in exchange I want universal reciprocity on CCW permits.
Deal?
That is not a functional proposal, as it would entail a conflict of state versus federal power. Congress can (theoretically) implement universal background checks. However, Congress does not have the power to mandate permit reciprocity, as licensing is a power reserved to the states.
NO..............now walk out of the room and tomorrow I'll say you were having a tantrum...........LOLHow about this: we get strong gun control, you kids can have your silly wall.I see lefties frequently screech about how 2A supporters refuse to compromise. Well, that's because there's never BEEN a compromise, rather a one-sided chipping away of 2nd Amendment rights with nothing offered in return.
So here, I'll offer an actual compromise. You lefties want universal background checks? I can get behind that. But in exchange I want universal reciprocity on CCW permits.
Deal?
Unlike tRump I don't have tantrums. I'm an adult.NO..............now walk out of the room and tomorrow I'll say you were having a tantrum...........LOLHow about this: we get strong gun control, you kids can have your silly wall.I see lefties frequently screech about how 2A supporters refuse to compromise. Well, that's because there's never BEEN a compromise, rather a one-sided chipping away of 2nd Amendment rights with nothing offered in return.
So here, I'll offer an actual compromise. You lefties want universal background checks? I can get behind that. But in exchange I want universal reciprocity on CCW permits.
Deal?
I see lefties frequently screech about how 2A supporters refuse to compromise. Well, that's because there's never BEEN a compromise, rather a one-sided chipping away of 2nd Amendment rights with nothing offered in return.
So here, I'll offer an actual compromise. You lefties want universal background checks? I can get behind that. But in exchange I want universal reciprocity on CCW permits.
Deal?
That is not a functional proposal, as it would entail a conflict of state versus federal power. Congress can (theoretically) implement universal background checks. However, Congress does not have the power to mandate permit reciprocity, as licensing is a power reserved to the states.
I see lefties frequently screech about how 2A supporters refuse to compromise. Well, that's because there's never BEEN a compromise, rather a one-sided chipping away of 2nd Amendment rights with nothing offered in return.
So here, I'll offer an actual compromise. You lefties want universal background checks? I can get behind that. But in exchange I want universal reciprocity on CCW permits.
Deal?
That is not a functional proposal, as it would entail a conflict of state versus federal power. Congress can (theoretically) implement universal background checks. However, Congress does not have the power to mandate permit reciprocity, as licensing is a power reserved to the states.
Oh, so NOW you lefties care about state rights?
Tell me then: if "licensing is a power reserved to the states" then why didn't you and your ilk respect that in regards to gay marriage?
[Well maybe they're is a trade there as well.
We will let them ask questions to qualify owning a gun, and we get to have a short test before people can vote. Nothing too hard, just questions like who is the VP, what party are they from, who is the Speaker of the House, who has the majority in the Senate, just simple things like that.
If you can't pass the test, you can't vote. Good bye Democrat leadership forever.
No, you attempted to propagate a ridiculous lie.It has to be more than just that.Conceal carry in any state or municipality?
Correct.
UBC for no restrictions at all on anyone who is cleared by a UBC. And I would like to know what the disqualifiers would be in advance and have a limiting clause so they can't add new disqualifiers after the fact.
A discussion to be had, for sure. I just laid out something relatively simple.
Again: there has been no ‘chipping away’ at Second Amendment rights.
The evolution of Second Amendment jurisprudence has in no manner been ‘one-sided.’
Current firearm regulatory measures are perfectly Constitutional and consistent with the Second Amendment – their constitutionality determined solely by the Supreme Court.
Because the 14th Amendment requires the states to allow all citizens residing in the states the right to due process and equal protection of the law.I see lefties frequently screech about how 2A supporters refuse to compromise. Well, that's because there's never BEEN a compromise, rather a one-sided chipping away of 2nd Amendment rights with nothing offered in return.
So here, I'll offer an actual compromise. You lefties want universal background checks? I can get behind that. But in exchange I want universal reciprocity on CCW permits.
Deal?
That is not a functional proposal, as it would entail a conflict of state versus federal power. Congress can (theoretically) implement universal background checks. However, Congress does not have the power to mandate permit reciprocity, as licensing is a power reserved to the states.
Oh, so NOW you lefties care about state rights?
Tell me then: if "licensing is a power reserved to the states" then why didn't you and your ilk respect that in regards to gay marriage?
How about this: we get strong gun control, you kids can have your silly wall.I see lefties frequently screech about how 2A supporters refuse to compromise. Well, that's because there's never BEEN a compromise, rather a one-sided chipping away of 2nd Amendment rights with nothing offered in return.
So here, I'll offer an actual compromise. You lefties want universal background checks? I can get behind that. But in exchange I want universal reciprocity on CCW permits.
Deal?
