The 1st and 2nd amendments had the same purpose

[Yousaidwhat]

A free press, freedom of speech, freedom of assembly and a right to vote have kept government in check for over 200 years. We have never needed a second amendment to keep the government in check

The second amendment is no longer needed. We have the most powerful military in history. We no longer need "Well Regulated Militias"
Civilians using arms against a tyrannical government may have been an option in 1776 but it is no longer an option today

The right to bear arms should be relegated to individual states as they see fit

The 2nd amendment is about everyone's inherent right to self protection. When the cops give up their guns, I'll consider giving up my right to one as well.

And good luck getting it appealed, until then go pound sand.

I agree

Americans should have a right to bear arms for self protection. It should be administered at the state and local level depending on their needs

There is no need to maintain a "Well Regulated Militia" or to arm citizens for a government takeover. So the federal government has no pressing need to ensure firearm rights

The Constitution states otherwise!

 

[Yousaidwhat]

The Second Amendment protects our freedom the same way our nuclear bombs protect us from atomic warfare

A nuclear bomb is a deterrent
A bunch of overweight gun nuts with power fantasies is not

You can imagine gun owners as overweight gun nuts with power fantasies if you like, but like the guy who came at me reaching for a knife learned, we're not pushovers.
We get it. You don't think anyone who doesn't share your politics should own a gun. That's your opinion. You are entitled to it, but the fact that it is YOUR opinion, doesn't make me overweight or a "nut" any more than my opinion of you makes you a horse's south end.

You have my sincere apologies. I never realized I was dealing with such a tough guy

I am sure you are prepared to go against an armed force with helicopters, tanks, Armed drones, body armor, night vision and the most advanced training in the world

I won't have to. The US Armed Forces would never take up arms against citizens defending their Constitutional rights.

They would against armed terrorists trying to take over the country

It is their duty

We went from armed citizen insurrection to armed terrorists!?

 

[rightwinger]

A free press, freedom of speech, freedom of assembly and a right to vote have ensured citizens a check on government overreach

Guns in private hands could never do that

The most spineless and uneducated in our society feel that guns are the only answer.

Hard to believe there are retards who think they could shoot it out with a modern armed forces

Hard to believe there are retards who think our modern Armed Forces would go to war against their families, friends and neighbors.

They wouldn't

Their families and friends would remain loyal to our country and oppose those trying an armed takeover

 

[rightwinger]

The 1st and 2nd amendments had the same purpose: protections against a tyrannical government.
Donald Trump is trying to take away the 1st amendment.
Most Trump supporters are sticklers on the 2nd amendment.
If you are a true believer in the constitution you should protect the 1st amendment as much as the 2nd amendment.

In today's world the 1st amendment is a realistic tool against a tyrannical government.
I do not feel owning all the guns in the world will protect you from an oppressive government today. Our government has many more weapons than guns.

You forget the military is filled with the rank and file of the general population. Far more of them would not attack their fellow citizens than robots who mindlessly follow orders.

We are talking about armed citizens attacking their own country
What makes you think our police and armed forces will not protect us?

Who are these armed citizens?

The rioters?

The looters?

Those you support destroying our cities?

Are you sure you are ready for Marshall Law?

You may not like us much when this occurs. We surely won't like you.

Anyone who ignores our constitutional rights and seeks regress through armed terrorism is a traitor

 

[Spare_change]

You sound, well, brain washed. Reduce your consumption of radical left talking points immediately.

Please explain the flaw in my argument.

You have made no argument.

Do you think the 1st amendment is as important as the 2nd amendment. I am sure your answer is yes.
Trump is trying undermine the freedom of the press.

Pretty simple.

Trump is not trying to undermine the freedom of the press.

Trump is trying to hold the press to standards of fairness, honesty, and accuracy.

They are resisting mightily --- but I suspect the American people will win, in the end.

The press has always been held to standards of honesty and accuracy. Nobody said life is fair

It is not up to the President to turn the public against the press

The press has NOT been held to standards of honesty and accuracy.

The press has always been accepted as holding itself to standards of honesty and accuracy.

Over the last 8 years, and particularly, within the last year, they have violated those standards repeatedly. It is incumbent on all of us - and especially those with a national microphone - to publicly demand honesty from the press, and to loudly, and strongly,denounce them when they fail.

 

[rightwinger]

Please explain the flaw in my argument.

You have made no argument.

Do you think the 1st amendment is as important as the 2nd amendment. I am sure your answer is yes.
Trump is trying undermine the freedom of the press.

Pretty simple.

Trump is not trying to undermine the freedom of the press.

Trump is trying to hold the press to standards of fairness, honesty, and accuracy.

They are resisting mightily --- but I suspect the American people will win, in the end.

The press has always been held to standards of honesty and accuracy. Nobody said life is fair

It is not up to the President to turn the public against the press

The press has NOT been held to standards of honesty and accuracy.

The press has always been accepted as holding itself to standards of honesty and accuracy.

Over the last 8 years, and particularly, within the last year, they have violated those standards repeatedly. It is incumbent on all of us - and especially those with a national microphone - to publicly demand honesty from the press, and to loudly, and strongly,denounce them when they fail.

Of course they are held to high standards. There is no one "press"
One outlet screws up, the others pile on

If only Trump met the standards held by the press for honesty

 

[Uncensored2008]

All of their stories are fully documented and sourced. Errors are quickly acknowledged and corrections are issued.

The Trump administration does not meet the same standards

Nope. and America knows it. You being a blowhard here is irrelevant; the public has no faith in the Leftist press.

________________

43. Who do you trust more to tell the public the truth -- the Trump administration or the reporters who cover the administration?

Trump administration - 45%
Reporters - 42%
(Both) - 2%
(Neither) -10%

11-13 Feb 17

http://static.politico.com/39/51/79db278d40d1a48e50747d74b48a/170217-fox-news-media-poll.pdf

 

[Uncensored2008]

[
Of course they are held to high standards. There is no one "press"
One outlet screws up, the others pile on

If only Trump met the standards held by the press for honesty

The press is held to no standards. As long as the press promotes the democratic - socialist party and smears anyone right of Pol Pot, they are given a pass.

 

[Uncensored2008]

[
Citizens militias could not even win the Revolutionary war

Against today's army they would be obliterated

Oh, and you think the army will stand with you treasonous fucks?

We are not the ones planning an armed takeover of the government

The right already has the government, moron.

 

[Uncensored2008]

They would against armed terrorists trying to take over the country

It is their duty

Are you of the Soros army planning to arm yourselves?

And you are openly saying that you democrats are in fact terrorists? I don't disagree, but I'm surprised at your candor.

 

[rightwinger]

All of their stories are fully documented and sourced. Errors are quickly acknowledged and corrections are issued.

The Trump administration does not meet the same standards

Nope. and America knows it. You being a blowhard here is irrelevant; the public has no faith in the Leftist press.

________________

43. Who do you trust more to tell the public the truth -- the Trump administration or the reporters who cover the administration?

Trump administration - 45%
Reporters - 42%
(Both) - 2%
(Neither) -10%

11-13 Feb 17

http://static.politico.com/39/51/79db278d40d1a48e50747d74b48a/170217-fox-news-media-poll.pdf

So Fox News does a poll that shows the public does not trust Fox

 

[rightwinger]

They would against armed terrorists trying to take over the country

It is their duty

Are you of the Soros army planning to arm yourselves?

And you are openly saying that you democrats are in fact terrorists? I don't disagree, but I'm surprised at your candor.

Actually..... we have used freedom of the press and the right to vote for generations

It is your side that runs for its guns when they don't get their way

 

[rightwinger]

A free press, freedom of speech, freedom of assembly and a right to vote have kept government in check for over 200 years. We have never needed a second amendment to keep the government in check

The second amendment is no longer needed. We have the most powerful military in history. We no longer need "Well Regulated Militias"
Civilians using arms against a tyrannical government may have been an option in 1776 but it is no longer an option today

The right to bear arms should be relegated to individual states as they see fit

The 2nd amendment is about everyone's inherent right to self protection. When the cops give up their guns, I'll consider giving up my right to one as well.

And good luck getting it appealed, until then go pound sand.

I agree

Americans should have a right to bear arms for self protection. It should be administered at the state and local level depending on their needs

There is no need to maintain a "Well Regulated Militia" or to arm citizens for a government takeover. So the federal government has no pressing need to ensure firearm rights

The Constitution states otherwise!

It is a quaint old amendment that is no longer needed. About as important as the third amendment

 

[Uncensored2008]

All of their stories are fully documented and sourced. Errors are quickly acknowledged and corrections are issued.

The Trump administration does not meet the same standards

Nope. and America knows it. You being a blowhard here is irrelevant; the public has no faith in the Leftist press.

________________

43. Who do you trust more to tell the public the truth -- the Trump administration or the reporters who cover the administration?

Trump administration - 45%
Reporters - 42%
(Both) - 2%
(Neither) -10%

11-13 Feb 17

http://static.politico.com/39/51/79db278d40d1a48e50747d74b48a/170217-fox-news-media-poll.pdf

So Fox News does a poll that shows the public does not trust Fox

The poll show that the public has more trust in Trump than in the corrupt press.

Pretending that the press is not in deep shit is delusional. You of the Khmer Rouge have relied on the corrupt press to present a false narrative to the public. The public no longer believes the press. Your chance of regaining power any time soon is greatly diminished.

 

[Yousaidwhat]

A free press, freedom of speech, freedom of assembly and a right to vote have kept government in check for over 200 years. We have never needed a second amendment to keep the government in check

The second amendment is no longer needed. We have the most powerful military in history. We no longer need "Well Regulated Militias"
Civilians using arms against a tyrannical government may have been an option in 1776 but it is no longer an option today

The right to bear arms should be relegated to individual states as they see fit

The 2nd amendment is about everyone's inherent right to self protection. When the cops give up their guns, I'll consider giving up my right to one as well.

And good luck getting it appealed, until then go pound sand.

I agree

Americans should have a right to bear arms for self protection. It should be administered at the state and local level depending on their needs

There is no need to maintain a "Well Regulated Militia" or to arm citizens for a government takeover. So the federal government has no pressing need to ensure firearm rights

The Constitution states otherwise!

It is a quaint old amendment that is no longer needed. About as important as the third amendment

Sorry RW.

I will have to disagree.

Otherwise, you know the process to alter the Constitution.

 

[2aguy]

They would against armed terrorists trying to take over the country

It is their duty

Are you of the Soros army planning to arm yourselves?

And you are openly saying that you democrats are in fact terrorists? I don't disagree, but I'm surprised at your candor.

Actually..... we have used freedom of the press and the right to vote for generations

It is your side that runs for its guns when they don't get their way

No......that is a lie....it was the democrats who used guns to keep their slaves...and started a Civil War....it was democrats who used guns to keep blacks from getting civil rights....it was the left wing in the 1960s who used bombs and guns to attack the United States....including bill ayers left wing democrat/communist, obama's good friend and political supporter here in Chicago, and his left wing/democrat wife, bernadine dorhn, who used bombs and guns in the 1960s.........

And it is left wingers who have committed political assassinations in this country.....not conservatives.....

 

[Uncensored2008]

[
Actually..... we have used freedom of the press and the right to vote for generations

It is your side that runs for its guns when they don't get their way

What limitations to the freedom of the press are there? Has Trump been jailing reporters the way Obama did? Evidence?

Or is it your contention that showing the press to be a bunch of lying scum somehow infringes on their freedom?

 

[Uncensored2008]

A free press, freedom of speech, freedom of assembly and a right to vote have kept government in check for over 200 years. We have never needed a second amendment to keep the government in check

The second amendment is no longer needed. We have the most powerful military in history. We no longer need "Well Regulated Militias"
Civilians using arms against a tyrannical government may have been an option in 1776 but it is no longer an option today

The right to bear arms should be relegated to individual states as they see fit

The 2nd amendment is about everyone's inherent right to self protection. When the cops give up their guns, I'll consider giving up my right to one as well.

And good luck getting it appealed, until then go pound sand.

I agree

Americans should have a right to bear arms for self protection. It should be administered at the state and local level depending on their needs

There is no need to maintain a "Well Regulated Militia" or to arm citizens for a government takeover. So the federal government has no pressing need to ensure firearm rights

The Constitution states otherwise!

It is a quaint old amendment that is no longer needed. About as important as the third amendment

Your hatred of civil liberties is noted, but you are on the losing side, Comrade.

 

[2aguy]

They would against armed terrorists trying to take over the country

It is their duty

Are you of the Soros army planning to arm yourselves?

And you are openly saying that you democrats are in fact terrorists? I don't disagree, but I'm surprised at your candor.

Actually..... we have used freedom of the press and the right to vote for generations

It is your side that runs for its guns when they don't get their way

Looking around the world...it is the left...socialists...who used guns to murder 100 million innocent men, women and children.......and the left is the reason we need the 2nd Amendment..to keep the left from trying to fill more mass graves with unarmed, innocent people....

 

[rightwinger]

A free press, freedom of speech, freedom of assembly and a right to vote have kept government in check for over 200 years. We have never needed a second amendment to keep the government in check

The second amendment is no longer needed. We have the most powerful military in history. We no longer need "Well Regulated Militias"
Civilians using arms against a tyrannical government may have been an option in 1776 but it is no longer an option today

The right to bear arms should be relegated to individual states as they see fit

The 2nd amendment is about everyone's inherent right to self protection. When the cops give up their guns, I'll consider giving up my right to one as well.

And good luck getting it appealed, until then go pound sand.

I agree

Americans should have a right to bear arms for self protection. It should be administered at the state and local level depending on their needs

There is no need to maintain a "Well Regulated Militia" or to arm citizens for a government takeover. So the federal government has no pressing need to ensure firearm rights

The Constitution states otherwise!

It is a quaint old amendment that is no longer needed. About as important as the third amendment

Sorry RW.

I will have to disagree.

Otherwise, you know the process to alter the Constitution.

Of course we know that will never happen

Just as much as we know the first amendment protects our freedom while the second amendment kills 30,000 Americans a year