CDZ This is the problem with universal background checks for gun "transfers," not "sales."

[AVG-JOE]

I paid $150 for my concealed carry permit and I have guns valued at about $2,000.

If you can't afford the license, how the fuck do you expect to pay for bullets?

The problem is that progressives when given an inch, take a mile. In NYC it costs $1000 and takes 3-6 months just to get a license to keep a revolver in your own home.

When one pays for reasonable processing, and the reasonable cost of a firearm, that is one thing. But governments and people that hate private ownership of firearms place procedures and costs to make people give up when it comes to getting a firearm.

and one can get a decent pistol for $200 or so, so the $2000 figure for weapons you state is moot.

All the more reason to establish REASONABLE federal standards for all the states to abide by and recognize.

I would LOVE to be able to whip out my FL CCP in MO, TX, and a host of other states to buy and walk away with a new gun.

The issue is that people in power think "reasonable" includes what I have to go through in NYC.

Boo-fucking-hoo

Then do what you can to change the people in power.

If you do your best and you're position is so unpopular that you feel like you're beating your head against a brick wall, accept that your position may be extreme and adjust or move on.

Democracy is NOT rocket science, y'all.

The issue is 2nd amendment rights should not be effected by direct democracy, unless 3/4 of the states and 2/3 of each part of congress decide to change or repeal the 2nd amendment. an enumerated right shouldn't be touchable by the whims of the locals.

We are not a democracy, we are a constitutional republic, and this republic's constitution says my RKBA shall not be infringed. Do you consider a 3-6 month waiting period and $1000 in fines to be infringement or not?

The reason that the states and localities have cobbled together what they have in a desperate attempt to stem the violence is the right-wing political goal of obstructing any and all discussion of the problems that guns can bring to our communities.

If you want the states to back off, tell your senators and congressmen to stop squelching national debate on the subject.

 

[martybegan]

Again,

Not caring about the rights of others is a shame.

I care about your rights. But not above the rights of your fellow New Yorkers.

If you can't find a pro-gun attorney in NY who's willing to look in to potential violations of The Second Amendment by NY state and local officials, your position on the subject may be extreme. I'm even willing to bet a dollar that the NRA would be more than happy to fund such an investigation, even if they need to hire attorneys from Texas who're licensed in NYto do it.

If your particular complaint is going unchallenged, I suppose that there is a slim chance that EVERY official in the state is in on the conspiracy....

I recommend starting a national campaign to bring the full political weight of American gun owners to bear against the problem. If nothing gets done after the NRA, you and others invest what they're willing in to the cause, you may want to look in to a move to Kansas. I heard once that the folks in Kansas have VERY liberal gun laws and don't need a license to carry openly, but I never researched it.



If we mix the liberal gun laws of Kansas, Wyoming and Texas with the conservative, tight weapons regulations of the Northeast and California in a spirit of compromise, we may just end up with REASONABLE national gun policy that's administered by the states.


Still not Rocket Science.........

It has been tried again and again, and the lawsuits go nowhere. Heller and McDonald have not reached the confines of NYC, and honestly the rest of NY would be happy if they blew the Tappan Zee bridge to bits and we drifted away. Hell, the stupid SAFE act passed, but is ignored upstate by local law enforcement.

 

[martybegan]

All the more reason to establish REASONABLE federal standards for all the states to abide by and recognize.

I would LOVE to be able to whip out my FL CCP in MO, TX, and a host of other states to buy and walk away with a new gun.

The issue is that people in power think "reasonable" includes what I have to go through in NYC.

Boo-fucking-hoo

Then do what you can to change the people in power.

If you do your best and you're position is so unpopular that you feel like you're beating your head against a brick wall, accept that your position may be extreme and adjust or move on.

Democracy is NOT rocket science, y'all.

The issue is 2nd amendment rights should not be effected by direct democracy, unless 3/4 of the states and 2/3 of each part of congress decide to change or repeal the 2nd amendment. an enumerated right shouldn't be touchable by the whims of the locals.

We are not a democracy, we are a constitutional republic, and this republic's constitution says my RKBA shall not be infringed. Do you consider a 3-6 month waiting period and $1000 in fines to be infringement or not?

What we think is irrelevant. what SCOTUS thinks is. You strict 2nd amendment folks seem to forget that. Protection of your rights only exists within the framework of judicial review.

That's the type of thinking that got us Plessey V Fergueson. So 5 of 9 unelected lawyers decide a handgun ban in constitutional, and all of sudden it is?

of course. surely you recognize that SOMEONE has to decide what actually is and isn't over reach? That you sometimes disagree with their opinions is irrelevant to the overall picture.

So bascially you defer to your betters. that is a European mindset, not an american one, which is one of the reasons this country is in trouble.

 

[martybegan]

I paid $150 for my concealed carry permit and I have guns valued at about $2,000.

If you can't afford the license, how the fuck do you expect to pay for bullets?

The problem is that progressives when given an inch, take a mile. In NYC it costs $1000 and takes 3-6 months just to get a license to keep a revolver in your own home.

When one pays for reasonable processing, and the reasonable cost of a firearm, that is one thing. But governments and people that hate private ownership of firearms place procedures and costs to make people give up when it comes to getting a firearm.

and one can get a decent pistol for $200 or so, so the $2000 figure for weapons you state is moot.

All the more reason to establish REASONABLE federal standards for all the states to abide by and recognize.

I would LOVE to be able to whip out my FL CCP in MO, TX, and a host of other states to buy and walk away with a new gun.

The issue is that people in power think "reasonable" includes what I have to go through in NYC.

Boo-fucking-hoo

Then do what you can to change the people in power.

If you do your best and you're position is so unpopular that you feel like you're beating your head against a brick wall, accept that your position may be extreme and adjust or move on.

Democracy is NOT rocket science, y'all.

The issue is 2nd amendment rights should not be effected by direct democracy, unless 3/4 of the states and 2/3 of each part of congress decide to change or repeal the 2nd amendment. an enumerated right shouldn't be touchable by the whims of the locals.

We are not a democracy, we are a constitutional republic, and this republic's constitution says my RKBA shall not be infringed. Do you consider a 3-6 month waiting period and $1000 in fines to be infringement or not?

The reason that the states and localities have cobbled together what they have in a desperate attempt to stem the violence is the right-wing political goal of obstructing any and all discussion of the problems that guns can bring to our communities.

If you want the states to back off, tell your senators and congressmen to stop squelching national debate on the subject.

And the only solution gun control people come up with is make it harder for law abiding citizens to get guns. Gun control people want everywhere to be NYC or worse. You can't have a national debate when one side is completely against private ownership of firearms.

 

[Fair&Balanced]

Boo-fucking-hoo

Then do what you can to change the people in power.

If you do your best and you're position is so unpopular that you feel like you're beating your head against a brick wall, accept that your position may be extreme and adjust or move on.

Democracy is NOT rocket science, y'all.

The issue is 2nd amendment rights should not be effected by direct democracy, unless 3/4 of the states and 2/3 of each part of congress decide to change or repeal the 2nd amendment. an enumerated right shouldn't be touchable by the whims of the locals.

We are not a democracy, we are a constitutional republic, and this republic's constitution says my RKBA shall not be infringed. Do you consider a 3-6 month waiting period and $1000 in fines to be infringement or not?

What we think is irrelevant. what SCOTUS thinks is. You strict 2nd amendment folks seem to forget that. Protection of your rights only exists within the framework of judicial review.

That's the type of thinking that got us Plessey V Fergueson. So 5 of 9 unelected lawyers decide a handgun ban in constitutional, and all of sudden it is?

of course. surely you recognize that SOMEONE has to decide what actually is and isn't over reach? That you sometimes disagree with their opinions is irrelevant to the overall picture.

So bascially you defer to your betters. that is a European mindset, not an american one, which is one of the reasons this country is in trouble.

I don't have any betters. But why did you avoid my question?

Do you agree that SOMEONE needs to have the power to actually tell the government "no, you overstepped here?" Yes or no?

 

[Fair&Balanced]

The problem is that progressives when given an inch, take a mile. In NYC it costs $1000 and takes 3-6 months just to get a license to keep a revolver in your own home.

When one pays for reasonable processing, and the reasonable cost of a firearm, that is one thing. But governments and people that hate private ownership of firearms place procedures and costs to make people give up when it comes to getting a firearm.

and one can get a decent pistol for $200 or so, so the $2000 figure for weapons you state is moot.

All the more reason to establish REASONABLE federal standards for all the states to abide by and recognize.

I would LOVE to be able to whip out my FL CCP in MO, TX, and a host of other states to buy and walk away with a new gun.

The issue is that people in power think "reasonable" includes what I have to go through in NYC.

Boo-fucking-hoo

Then do what you can to change the people in power.

If you do your best and you're position is so unpopular that you feel like you're beating your head against a brick wall, accept that your position may be extreme and adjust or move on.

Democracy is NOT rocket science, y'all.

The issue is 2nd amendment rights should not be effected by direct democracy, unless 3/4 of the states and 2/3 of each part of congress decide to change or repeal the 2nd amendment. an enumerated right shouldn't be touchable by the whims of the locals.

We are not a democracy, we are a constitutional republic, and this republic's constitution says my RKBA shall not be infringed. Do you consider a 3-6 month waiting period and $1000 in fines to be infringement or not?

The reason that the states and localities have cobbled together what they have in a desperate attempt to stem the violence is the right-wing political goal of obstructing any and all discussion of the problems that guns can bring to our communities.

If you want the states to back off, tell your senators and congressmen to stop squelching national debate on the subject.

And the only solution gun control people come up with is make it harder for law abiding citizens to get guns. Gun control people want everywhere to be NYC or worse. You can't have a national debate when one side is completely against private ownership of firearms.

And likewise, you can't have a reasonable debate when one side is completely against any form of reasonable vetting to ensure that we keep as many ill suited people from having guns as possible.

And I'm sorry if you think it's acceptable that people can sell guns on Facebook or Craigslist without even knowing who it is they are selling to and just say "well arrest them if they get caught owning a gun they shouldnt have had" you are as stupid as the person who thinks all semi automatic weapons should be banned

 

[AVG-JOE]

I paid $150 for my concealed carry permit and I have guns valued at about $2,000.

If you can't afford the license, how the fuck do you expect to pay for bullets?

The problem is that progressives when given an inch, take a mile. In NYC it costs $1000 and takes 3-6 months just to get a license to keep a revolver in your own home.

When one pays for reasonable processing, and the reasonable cost of a firearm, that is one thing. But governments and people that hate private ownership of firearms place procedures and costs to make people give up when it comes to getting a firearm.

and one can get a decent pistol for $200 or so, so the $2000 figure for weapons you state is moot.

All the more reason to establish REASONABLE federal standards for all the states to abide by and recognize.

I would LOVE to be able to whip out my FL CCP in MO, TX, and a host of other states to buy and walk away with a new gun.

The issue is that people in power think "reasonable" includes what I have to go through in NYC.

Boo-fucking-hoo

Then do what you can to change the people in power.

If you do your best and you're position is so unpopular that you feel like you're beating your head against a brick wall, accept that your position may be extreme and adjust or move on.

Democracy is NOT rocket science, y'all.

PLUS , I think if I felt so strongly against a law that my local city/state had and refused to change that I would probably you know MOVE rather than whine on a message board.

I have family here that I need to take care of, so moving is a no go. Plus, since RKBA is a federally protected enumerated right, why should I be the one who has to move? Why shouldn't they be forced to follow the Constitution?

Your regional neighbors at this particular here and now ARE abiding by The Constitution. You and they, like the rest of us, are doing the best We collectively can in a democracy where less than half of us vote.

If you are unwilling to change regions over this issue, your only course of action is to do the best you can within the framework of all of the laws that you are subject to in the region you choose to live in, and to thank your preferred Deity that you have a say so in those laws. Accepting our responsibility to live with the laws We collectively give ourselves at any given point in time, even the ones we feel are just not right, is just as deep as our responsibility is to convince our friends, neighbors and countrymen of the things within those codes that we feel are just not right.

 

[martybegan]

The issue is 2nd amendment rights should not be effected by direct democracy, unless 3/4 of the states and 2/3 of each part of congress decide to change or repeal the 2nd amendment. an enumerated right shouldn't be touchable by the whims of the locals.

We are not a democracy, we are a constitutional republic, and this republic's constitution says my RKBA shall not be infringed. Do you consider a 3-6 month waiting period and $1000 in fines to be infringement or not?

What we think is irrelevant. what SCOTUS thinks is. You strict 2nd amendment folks seem to forget that. Protection of your rights only exists within the framework of judicial review.

That's the type of thinking that got us Plessey V Fergueson. So 5 of 9 unelected lawyers decide a handgun ban in constitutional, and all of sudden it is?

of course. surely you recognize that SOMEONE has to decide what actually is and isn't over reach? That you sometimes disagree with their opinions is irrelevant to the overall picture.

So bascially you defer to your betters. that is a European mindset, not an american one, which is one of the reasons this country is in trouble.

I don't have any betters. But why did you avoid my question?

Do you agree that SOMEONE needs to have the power to actually tell the government "no, you overstepped here?" Yes or no?

Yes, someone does, but the SC today has decided it can legislate, instead of adjudicate, and create rights out of thin air. The problem is a court that decides it can create rights can also remove them.

 

[martybegan]

All the more reason to establish REASONABLE federal standards for all the states to abide by and recognize.

I would LOVE to be able to whip out my FL CCP in MO, TX, and a host of other states to buy and walk away with a new gun.

The issue is that people in power think "reasonable" includes what I have to go through in NYC.

Boo-fucking-hoo

Then do what you can to change the people in power.

If you do your best and you're position is so unpopular that you feel like you're beating your head against a brick wall, accept that your position may be extreme and adjust or move on.

Democracy is NOT rocket science, y'all.

The issue is 2nd amendment rights should not be effected by direct democracy, unless 3/4 of the states and 2/3 of each part of congress decide to change or repeal the 2nd amendment. an enumerated right shouldn't be touchable by the whims of the locals.

We are not a democracy, we are a constitutional republic, and this republic's constitution says my RKBA shall not be infringed. Do you consider a 3-6 month waiting period and $1000 in fines to be infringement or not?

The reason that the states and localities have cobbled together what they have in a desperate attempt to stem the violence is the right-wing political goal of obstructing any and all discussion of the problems that guns can bring to our communities.

If you want the states to back off, tell your senators and congressmen to stop squelching national debate on the subject.

And the only solution gun control people come up with is make it harder for law abiding citizens to get guns. Gun control people want everywhere to be NYC or worse. You can't have a national debate when one side is completely against private ownership of firearms.

And likewise, you can't have a reasonable debate when one side is completely against any form of reasonable vetting to ensure that we keep as many ill suited people from having guns as possible.

And I'm sorry if you think it's acceptable that people can sell guns on Facebook or Craigslist without even knowing who it is they are selling to and just say "well arrest them if they get caught owning a gun they shouldnt have had" you are as stupid as the person who thinks all semi automatic weapons should be banned

Why should I support more laws when my own rights are being infringed? Fix my situation first, then we can talk.

 

[AVG-JOE]

Again,

Not caring about the rights of others is a shame.

I care about your rights. But not above the rights of your fellow New Yorkers.

If you can't find a pro-gun attorney in NY who's willing to look in to potential violations of The Second Amendment by NY state and local officials, your position on the subject may be extreme. I'm even willing to bet a dollar that the NRA would be more than happy to fund such an investigation, even if they need to hire attorneys from Texas who're licensed in NYto do it.

If your particular complaint is going unchallenged, I suppose that there is a slim chance that EVERY official in the state is in on the conspiracy....

I recommend starting a national campaign to bring the full political weight of American gun owners to bear against the problem. If nothing gets done after the NRA, you and others invest what they're willing in to the cause, you may want to look in to a move to Kansas. I heard once that the folks in Kansas have VERY liberal gun laws and don't need a license to carry openly, but I never researched it.



If we mix the liberal gun laws of Kansas, Wyoming and Texas with the conservative, tight weapons regulations of the Northeast and California in a spirit of compromise, we may just end up with REASONABLE national gun policy that's administered by the states.


Still not Rocket Science.........

It has been tried again and again, and the lawsuits go nowhere. Heller and McDonald have not reached the confines of NYC, and honestly the rest of NY would be happy if they blew the Tappan Zee bridge to bits and we drifted away. Hell, the stupid SAFE act passed, but is ignored upstate by local law enforcement.

One more good reason to tell our national representatives that the time for squelching the national discussion on guns has come to an end and it's time for a reasonable and dynamic national policy on guns.

 

[martybegan]

The problem is that progressives when given an inch, take a mile. In NYC it costs $1000 and takes 3-6 months just to get a license to keep a revolver in your own home.

When one pays for reasonable processing, and the reasonable cost of a firearm, that is one thing. But governments and people that hate private ownership of firearms place procedures and costs to make people give up when it comes to getting a firearm.

and one can get a decent pistol for $200 or so, so the $2000 figure for weapons you state is moot.

All the more reason to establish REASONABLE federal standards for all the states to abide by and recognize.

I would LOVE to be able to whip out my FL CCP in MO, TX, and a host of other states to buy and walk away with a new gun.

The issue is that people in power think "reasonable" includes what I have to go through in NYC.

Boo-fucking-hoo

Then do what you can to change the people in power.

If you do your best and you're position is so unpopular that you feel like you're beating your head against a brick wall, accept that your position may be extreme and adjust or move on.

Democracy is NOT rocket science, y'all.

PLUS , I think if I felt so strongly against a law that my local city/state had and refused to change that I would probably you know MOVE rather than whine on a message board.

I have family here that I need to take care of, so moving is a no go. Plus, since RKBA is a federally protected enumerated right, why should I be the one who has to move? Why shouldn't they be forced to follow the Constitution?

Your regional neighbors at this particular here and now ARE abiding by The Constitution. You and they, like the rest of us, are doing the best We collectively can in a democracy where less than half of us vote.

If you are unwilling to change regions over this issue, your only course of action is to do the best you can within the framework of all of the laws that you are subject to in the region you choose to live in, and to thank your preferred Deity that you have a say so in those laws. Accepting our responsibility to live with the laws We collectively give ourselves at any given point in time, even the ones we feel are just not right, is just as deep as our responsibility is to convince our friends, neighbors and countrymen of the things within those codes that we feel are just not right.

Again, not a democracy, a constitutional republic. Certain things cannot be overrode by the simple will of the majority.

I don't own an illegal firearm, so I am following the laws. However the laws are unconstitutional in this case, and the courts are willful stooges in keeping it that way.

but hey, "you got yours", so my situation is "too bad, so sad".

And I notice you haven't answered my post on your taunting, or deleted your post on it. Another case of rules for thee but not for me?

 

[martybegan]

Again,

Not caring about the rights of others is a shame.

I care about your rights. But not above the rights of your fellow New Yorkers.

If you can't find a pro-gun attorney in NY who's willing to look in to potential violations of The Second Amendment by NY state and local officials, your position on the subject may be extreme. I'm even willing to bet a dollar that the NRA would be more than happy to fund such an investigation, even if they need to hire attorneys from Texas who're licensed in NYto do it.

If your particular complaint is going unchallenged, I suppose that there is a slim chance that EVERY official in the state is in on the conspiracy....

I recommend starting a national campaign to bring the full political weight of American gun owners to bear against the problem. If nothing gets done after the NRA, you and others invest what they're willing in to the cause, you may want to look in to a move to Kansas. I heard once that the folks in Kansas have VERY liberal gun laws and don't need a license to carry openly, but I never researched it.



If we mix the liberal gun laws of Kansas, Wyoming and Texas with the conservative, tight weapons regulations of the Northeast and California in a spirit of compromise, we may just end up with REASONABLE national gun policy that's administered by the states.


Still not Rocket Science.........

It has been tried again and again, and the lawsuits go nowhere. Heller and McDonald have not reached the confines of NYC, and honestly the rest of NY would be happy if they blew the Tappan Zee bridge to bits and we drifted away. Hell, the stupid SAFE act passed, but is ignored upstate by local law enforcement.

One more good reason to tell our national representatives that the time for squelching the national discussion on guns has come to an end and it's time for a reasonable and dynamic national policy on guns.

The only national policy is that law abiding citizens should be able to get a firearm if they so choose, without waiting 3 months or paying $1000.

 

[AVG-JOE]

All the more reason to establish REASONABLE federal standards for all the states to abide by and recognize.

I would LOVE to be able to whip out my FL CCP in MO, TX, and a host of other states to buy and walk away with a new gun.

The issue is that people in power think "reasonable" includes what I have to go through in NYC.

Boo-fucking-hoo

Then do what you can to change the people in power.

If you do your best and you're position is so unpopular that you feel like you're beating your head against a brick wall, accept that your position may be extreme and adjust or move on.

Democracy is NOT rocket science, y'all.

PLUS , I think if I felt so strongly against a law that my local city/state had and refused to change that I would probably you know MOVE rather than whine on a message board.

I have family here that I need to take care of, so moving is a no go. Plus, since RKBA is a federally protected enumerated right, why should I be the one who has to move? Why shouldn't they be forced to follow the Constitution?

Your regional neighbors at this particular here and now ARE abiding by The Constitution. You and they, like the rest of us, are doing the best We collectively can in a democracy where less than half of us vote.

If you are unwilling to change regions over this issue, your only course of action is to do the best you can within the framework of all of the laws that you are subject to in the region you choose to live in, and to thank your preferred Deity that you have a say so in those laws. Accepting our responsibility to live with the laws We collectively give ourselves at any given point in time, even the ones we feel are just not right, is just as deep as our responsibility is to convince our friends, neighbors and countrymen of the things within those codes that we feel are just not right.

Again, not a democracy, a constitutional republic. Certain things cannot be overrode by the simple will of the majority.

I don't own an illegal firearm, so I am following the laws. However the laws are unconstitutional in this case, and the courts are willful stooges in keeping it that way.

but hey, "you got yours", so my situation is "too bad, so sad".

And I notice you haven't answered my post on your taunting, or deleted your post on it. Another case of rules for thee but not for me?

True. The Republican Party was formed in the mid 1800's to prosecute a bloody civil war to establish the right and the responsibility of the federal government to tell the states to shove it up their asses if the collective Republic they are members of deems it appropriate.

This is why the NRA and the Religious Right got in to bed together under the Republican roof. They wanted to be able to dictate their views on things from a national level. Politically smart, actually.

Now we've come full circle and the message from the NRA to squelch the national discussion on fire-arms on a national level is causing enough harm to our communities to entice state leaders to dance as close as they can to the edge of violating The Second Amendment.

Interesting mess, eh?

Solved with a REASONABLE national policy on guns that nobody is completely happy with.

 

[AVG-JOE]

Again,

Not caring about the rights of others is a shame.

I care about your rights. But not above the rights of your fellow New Yorkers.

If you can't find a pro-gun attorney in NY who's willing to look in to potential violations of The Second Amendment by NY state and local officials, your position on the subject may be extreme. I'm even willing to bet a dollar that the NRA would be more than happy to fund such an investigation, even if they need to hire attorneys from Texas who're licensed in NYto do it.

If your particular complaint is going unchallenged, I suppose that there is a slim chance that EVERY official in the state is in on the conspiracy....

I recommend starting a national campaign to bring the full political weight of American gun owners to bear against the problem. If nothing gets done after the NRA, you and others invest what they're willing in to the cause, you may want to look in to a move to Kansas. I heard once that the folks in Kansas have VERY liberal gun laws and don't need a license to carry openly, but I never researched it.



If we mix the liberal gun laws of Kansas, Wyoming and Texas with the conservative, tight weapons regulations of the Northeast and California in a spirit of compromise, we may just end up with REASONABLE national gun policy that's administered by the states.


Still not Rocket Science.........

It has been tried again and again, and the lawsuits go nowhere. Heller and McDonald have not reached the confines of NYC, and honestly the rest of NY would be happy if they blew the Tappan Zee bridge to bits and we drifted away. Hell, the stupid SAFE act passed, but is ignored upstate by local law enforcement.

One more good reason to tell our national representatives that the time for squelching the national discussion on guns has come to an end and it's time for a reasonable and dynamic national policy on guns.

The only national policy is that law abiding citizens should be able to get a firearm if they so choose, without waiting 3 months or paying $1000.

Perfect!!!

The only thing sweeter would be that, along with some sort of wallet sized document that I could carry easily and whip out in any state to verify that I was law-abiding enough to own firearms, so that I can buy a gun anywhere I travel.

 

[2aguy]

Boo-fucking-hoo

Then do what you can to change the people in power.

If you do your best and you're position is so unpopular that you feel like you're beating your head against a brick wall, accept that your position may be extreme and adjust or move on.

Democracy is NOT rocket science, y'all.

PLUS , I think if I felt so strongly against a law that my local city/state had and refused to change that I would probably you know MOVE rather than whine on a message board.

I have family here that I need to take care of, so moving is a no go. Plus, since RKBA is a federally protected enumerated right, why should I be the one who has to move? Why shouldn't they be forced to follow the Constitution?

Your regional neighbors at this particular here and now ARE abiding by The Constitution. You and they, like the rest of us, are doing the best We collectively can in a democracy where less than half of us vote.

If you are unwilling to change regions over this issue, your only course of action is to do the best you can within the framework of all of the laws that you are subject to in the region you choose to live in, and to thank your preferred Deity that you have a say so in those laws. Accepting our responsibility to live with the laws We collectively give ourselves at any given point in time, even the ones we feel are just not right, is just as deep as our responsibility is to convince our friends, neighbors and countrymen of the things within those codes that we feel are just not right.

Again, not a democracy, a constitutional republic. Certain things cannot be overrode by the simple will of the majority.

I don't own an illegal firearm, so I am following the laws. However the laws are unconstitutional in this case, and the courts are willful stooges in keeping it that way.

but hey, "you got yours", so my situation is "too bad, so sad".

And I notice you haven't answered my post on your taunting, or deleted your post on it. Another case of rules for thee but not for me?

True. The Republican Party was formed in the mid 1800's to prosecute a bloody civil war to establish the right and the responsibility of the federal government to tell the states to shove it up their asses if the collective Republic they are members of deems it appropriate.

This is why the NRA and the Religious Right got in to bed together under the Republican roof. They wanted to be able to dictate their views on things from a national level. Politically smart, actually.

Now we've come full circle and the message from the NRA to squelch the national discussion on fire-arms on a national level is causing enough harm to our communities to entice state leaders to dance as close as they can to the edge of violating The Second Amendment.

Interesting mess, eh?

Solved with a REASONABLE national policy on guns that nobody is completely happy with.

No...the Republican party was created to end slavery and free black slaves from the democrats who owned them. The NRA......has nothing to do with felons, who cannot legally own a gun or carry it...shooting other criminals in democrat controlled voting districts.....

 

[2aguy]

Boo-fucking-hoo

Then do what you can to change the people in power.

If you do your best and you're position is so unpopular that you feel like you're beating your head against a brick wall, accept that your position may be extreme and adjust or move on.

Democracy is NOT rocket science, y'all.

PLUS , I think if I felt so strongly against a law that my local city/state had and refused to change that I would probably you know MOVE rather than whine on a message board.

I have family here that I need to take care of, so moving is a no go. Plus, since RKBA is a federally protected enumerated right, why should I be the one who has to move? Why shouldn't they be forced to follow the Constitution?

Your regional neighbors at this particular here and now ARE abiding by The Constitution. You and they, like the rest of us, are doing the best We collectively can in a democracy where less than half of us vote.

If you are unwilling to change regions over this issue, your only course of action is to do the best you can within the framework of all of the laws that you are subject to in the region you choose to live in, and to thank your preferred Deity that you have a say so in those laws. Accepting our responsibility to live with the laws We collectively give ourselves at any given point in time, even the ones we feel are just not right, is just as deep as our responsibility is to convince our friends, neighbors and countrymen of the things within those codes that we feel are just not right.

Again, not a democracy, a constitutional republic. Certain things cannot be overrode by the simple will of the majority.

I don't own an illegal firearm, so I am following the laws. However the laws are unconstitutional in this case, and the courts are willful stooges in keeping it that way.

but hey, "you got yours", so my situation is "too bad, so sad".

And I notice you haven't answered my post on your taunting, or deleted your post on it. Another case of rules for thee but not for me?

True. The Republican Party was formed in the mid 1800's to prosecute a bloody civil war to establish the right and the responsibility of the federal government to tell the states to shove it up their asses if the collective Republic they are members of deems it appropriate.

This is why the NRA and the Religious Right got in to bed together under the Republican roof. They wanted to be able to dictate their views on things from a national level. Politically smart, actually.

Now we've come full circle and the message from the NRA to squelch the national discussion on fire-arms on a national level is causing enough harm to our communities to entice state leaders to dance as close as they can to the edge of violating The Second Amendment.

Interesting mess, eh?

Solved with a REASONABLE national policy on guns that nobody is completely happy with.

And yet nothing you guys propose is reasonable or even effective...and when we show that they are unConstitutional, and won't stop gun violence...you attack the NRA, say we don't want laws....and other nonsense....

 

[GaryDog]

PLUS , I think if I felt so strongly against a law that my local city/state had and refused to change that I would probably you know MOVE rather than whine on a message board.

I have family here that I need to take care of, so moving is a no go. Plus, since RKBA is a federally protected enumerated right, why should I be the one who has to move? Why shouldn't they be forced to follow the Constitution?

Your regional neighbors at this particular here and now ARE abiding by The Constitution. You and they, like the rest of us, are doing the best We collectively can in a democracy where less than half of us vote.

If you are unwilling to change regions over this issue, your only course of action is to do the best you can within the framework of all of the laws that you are subject to in the region you choose to live in, and to thank your preferred Deity that you have a say so in those laws. Accepting our responsibility to live with the laws We collectively give ourselves at any given point in time, even the ones we feel are just not right, is just as deep as our responsibility is to convince our friends, neighbors and countrymen of the things within those codes that we feel are just not right.

Again, not a democracy, a constitutional republic. Certain things cannot be overrode by the simple will of the majority.

I don't own an illegal firearm, so I am following the laws. However the laws are unconstitutional in this case, and the courts are willful stooges in keeping it that way.

but hey, "you got yours", so my situation is "too bad, so sad".

And I notice you haven't answered my post on your taunting, or deleted your post on it. Another case of rules for thee but not for me?

True. The Republican Party was formed in the mid 1800's to prosecute a bloody civil war to establish the right and the responsibility of the federal government to tell the states to shove it up their asses if the collective Republic they are members of deems it appropriate.

This is why the NRA and the Religious Right got in to bed together under the Republican roof. They wanted to be able to dictate their views on things from a national level. Politically smart, actually.

Now we've come full circle and the message from the NRA to squelch the national discussion on fire-arms on a national level is causing enough harm to our communities to entice state leaders to dance as close as they can to the edge of violating The Second Amendment.

Interesting mess, eh?

Solved with a REASONABLE national policy on guns that nobody is completely happy with.

No...the Republican party was created to end slavery and free black slaves from the democrats who owned them. The NRA......has nothing to do with felons, who cannot legally own a gun or carry it...shooting other criminals in democrat controlled voting districts.....

And the Republican Party evolved into an entity that purposefully exploited white racism to garner votes. That concludes 6th grade social studies.

The NRA's purpose? Make money for gun manufacturers. End of story.

 

[GaryDog]

PLUS , I think if I felt so strongly against a law that my local city/state had and refused to change that I would probably you know MOVE rather than whine on a message board.

I have family here that I need to take care of, so moving is a no go. Plus, since RKBA is a federally protected enumerated right, why should I be the one who has to move? Why shouldn't they be forced to follow the Constitution?

Your regional neighbors at this particular here and now ARE abiding by The Constitution. You and they, like the rest of us, are doing the best We collectively can in a democracy where less than half of us vote.

If you are unwilling to change regions over this issue, your only course of action is to do the best you can within the framework of all of the laws that you are subject to in the region you choose to live in, and to thank your preferred Deity that you have a say so in those laws. Accepting our responsibility to live with the laws We collectively give ourselves at any given point in time, even the ones we feel are just not right, is just as deep as our responsibility is to convince our friends, neighbors and countrymen of the things within those codes that we feel are just not right.

Again, not a democracy, a constitutional republic. Certain things cannot be overrode by the simple will of the majority.

I don't own an illegal firearm, so I am following the laws. However the laws are unconstitutional in this case, and the courts are willful stooges in keeping it that way.

but hey, "you got yours", so my situation is "too bad, so sad".

And I notice you haven't answered my post on your taunting, or deleted your post on it. Another case of rules for thee but not for me?

True. The Republican Party was formed in the mid 1800's to prosecute a bloody civil war to establish the right and the responsibility of the federal government to tell the states to shove it up their asses if the collective Republic they are members of deems it appropriate.

This is why the NRA and the Religious Right got in to bed together under the Republican roof. They wanted to be able to dictate their views on things from a national level. Politically smart, actually.

Now we've come full circle and the message from the NRA to squelch the national discussion on fire-arms on a national level is causing enough harm to our communities to entice state leaders to dance as close as they can to the edge of violating The Second Amendment.

Interesting mess, eh?

Solved with a REASONABLE national policy on guns that nobody is completely happy with.

And yet nothing you guys propose is reasonable or even effective...and when we show that they are unConstitutional, and won't stop gun violence...you attack the NRA, say we don't want laws....and other nonsense....

Nevermind that other western nations bearing striking similarities to our own in size, population density and demography have input these gun control laws such that gun violence has been all but stopped.

Keep ignoring the rest of the world. Just focus on your own interpretation of Chicago, right?

Cue bogus "defensive use" stat in 3....2....1....

 

[2aguy]

All the more reason to establish REASONABLE federal standards for all the states to abide by and recognize.

I would LOVE to be able to whip out my FL CCP in MO, TX, and a host of other states to buy and walk away with a new gun.

The issue is that people in power think "reasonable" includes what I have to go through in NYC.

Boo-fucking-hoo

Then do what you can to change the people in power.

If you do your best and you're position is so unpopular that you feel like you're beating your head against a brick wall, accept that your position may be extreme and adjust or move on.

Democracy is NOT rocket science, y'all.

The issue is 2nd amendment rights should not be effected by direct democracy, unless 3/4 of the states and 2/3 of each part of congress decide to change or repeal the 2nd amendment. an enumerated right shouldn't be touchable by the whims of the locals.

We are not a democracy, we are a constitutional republic, and this republic's constitution says my RKBA shall not be infringed. Do you consider a 3-6 month waiting period and $1000 in fines to be infringement or not?

The reason that the states and localities have cobbled together what they have in a desperate attempt to stem the violence is the right-wing political goal of obstructing any and all discussion of the problems that guns can bring to our communities.

If you want the states to back off, tell your senators and congressmen to stop squelching national debate on the subject.

And the only solution gun control people come up with is make it harder for law abiding citizens to get guns. Gun control people want everywhere to be NYC or worse. You can't have a national debate when one side is completely against private ownership of firearms.

And likewise, you can't have a reasonable debate when one side is completely against any form of reasonable vetting to ensure that we keep as many ill suited people from having guns as possible.

And I'm sorry if you think it's acceptable that people can sell guns on Facebook or Craigslist without even knowing who it is they are selling to and just say "well arrest them if they get caught owning a gun they shouldnt have had" you are as stupid as the person who thinks all semi automatic weapons should be banned

So....you have your background check system...and someone doesn't care and thinks they can get away with it...they sell the gun anyway......you background check failed...but now everyone has to beg the feds to own a gun.....

Then...a criminal wants a gun from facebook...so he gets his baby mama or grandma to get it and go through your background check......your background check failed....but...now everyone else...who isn't going to use the gun for crime or mass shootings...now has to ask the federal government if they can have a permit to own guns.....

That is why your system is flawed.....you give more power to the government to pull off what New York and New Jersey already do...as well as Cali.......and you don't stop actual crime or mass shootings.....

You can do everything you say you want...by simply arresting people when they break the law......

 

[2aguy]

I have family here that I need to take care of, so moving is a no go. Plus, since RKBA is a federally protected enumerated right, why should I be the one who has to move? Why shouldn't they be forced to follow the Constitution?

Your regional neighbors at this particular here and now ARE abiding by The Constitution. You and they, like the rest of us, are doing the best We collectively can in a democracy where less than half of us vote.

If you are unwilling to change regions over this issue, your only course of action is to do the best you can within the framework of all of the laws that you are subject to in the region you choose to live in, and to thank your preferred Deity that you have a say so in those laws. Accepting our responsibility to live with the laws We collectively give ourselves at any given point in time, even the ones we feel are just not right, is just as deep as our responsibility is to convince our friends, neighbors and countrymen of the things within those codes that we feel are just not right.

Again, not a democracy, a constitutional republic. Certain things cannot be overrode by the simple will of the majority.

I don't own an illegal firearm, so I am following the laws. However the laws are unconstitutional in this case, and the courts are willful stooges in keeping it that way.

but hey, "you got yours", so my situation is "too bad, so sad".

And I notice you haven't answered my post on your taunting, or deleted your post on it. Another case of rules for thee but not for me?

True. The Republican Party was formed in the mid 1800's to prosecute a bloody civil war to establish the right and the responsibility of the federal government to tell the states to shove it up their asses if the collective Republic they are members of deems it appropriate.

This is why the NRA and the Religious Right got in to bed together under the Republican roof. They wanted to be able to dictate their views on things from a national level. Politically smart, actually.

Now we've come full circle and the message from the NRA to squelch the national discussion on fire-arms on a national level is causing enough harm to our communities to entice state leaders to dance as close as they can to the edge of violating The Second Amendment.

Interesting mess, eh?

Solved with a REASONABLE national policy on guns that nobody is completely happy with.

No...the Republican party was created to end slavery and free black slaves from the democrats who owned them. The NRA......has nothing to do with felons, who cannot legally own a gun or carry it...shooting other criminals in democrat controlled voting districts.....

And the Republican Party evolved into an entity that purposefully exploited white racism to garner votes. That concludes 6th grade social studies.

The NRA's purpose? Make money for gun manufacturers. End of story.

Sorry...didn't happen. The republicans don't care about race...the democrat party is obsessed with race.

The NRAs purpose.....gun safety education and protecting the 2nd Amendment....