Do republicans have a limit on their philosophy of gun-owning freedom?

[OKTexas]

Wrong answer, you need to train yourself on how and when you should deploy a firearm. If you wait to think about it when the shit hits the fan you're more likely to hurt someone you don't intend to. You have to make situational awareness a priority every time you carry a gun.

You have the right to carry but you do not have the right to fire that gun. If you do fire a gun it's up to you to prove you did it for a god damned good reason

Bullshit, I can walk outside my house now a fire any weapon I have and no one will say a word. Also if I us my firearm in self defense or in the defense of others, the police have to prove I wasn't fully justified, not the other way around.

You have to prove your case that you were justified in shooting in self defense. I've read enough about shooting cases to know that it's not innocent until proven guilty when it comes to self defense

And obviously shooting on your property or at a range is different than shooting your gun while in public places. I didn't think I had to specify that because it was so obvious

What do you tell a cop when he asks why you shot the guy 5 times? Answer, 4 wasn't enough to end the threat and 6 would have been too many. And yes, the burden of proof is always on law enforcement.

be that cavalier about taking a life and you just make it harder for yourself to prove self defense

Actually law enforcement would understand that answer better than most, they are trained to keep firing until the individual goes down. You must live in one of the commie States that don't think you have a right to self defense. Police here don't tend to automatically take the criminals side.

 

[OKTexas]

Guns = Good

Mine is nicer, the AR that is.

 

[Norman]

Like is it in their fantasy for it to one day be legal for anyone to open-carry automatic rifles whenever and where ever?

My question is where do gun nuts draw the line? Like when it comes to open carry, what rules should it have? Should it have no rules? Like some dumb redneck carrying a gun into a bar til 2 AM is okay? Anyone should be allowed to do that?

As usual republicans struggle with nuance when it comes to political issues they are obsessed with. For example, cons will likely reply to this thread and start making the ridiculous claim that I think the 2nd amendment should be overturned. I don't. I also don't think semi-automatics should be illegal. I support laws that are designed to keep guns out of the hands of dangerous people. I also think open carry is ridiculous.

It doesn't really matter if I say all of that though. In their minds I'm a "snowflake" that is outraged over boys playing with toy guns. I'm nothing but a naive, pretentious "libtard" with a Gender's Studies degree who thinks guns are evil. Cliche is something easy for republicans to grasp I guess.

Why are you thinking that anyone cares what you think or don't think is ridiculous?

 

[danielpalos]

Guns = Good

well regulated = better.

just a militia chic insisting guys have to become more well regulated, at any cost?

 

[2aguy]

your thread is about guns, they are not guns.....

I'm aware. I asked you a new question. Try to keep up, pumpkin.

Your question has been answered by Scalia.

I know that you probably cannot read too good so you will likely never find the answer yourself in the Court's published decision, Pumpkin.

That's why I gave you nutshell explanations.

Scalia says very clearly in that opinion that as with all rights, the second is not unlimited.

Yes.....we know....you guys take that to mean you can legislate away gun rights as long as BB guns are still legal with strict government supervision........

we already limit gun rights to law abiding citizens...that is all we need......and if you break the law....you go to jail....done...

I take it to mean exactly what it says.
It's you folks who scream and holler your objections no matter what is suggested.

Wrong.....you guys suggest things that do nothing to actually stop criminals or mass shooters...we ooint that fact out...then you post dumb posts like this accusing us of opposing everything.......we state the reasons your ideas do not work...you cannot deny that so you lie about us.

 

[westwall]

Like is it in their fantasy for it to one day be legal for anyone to open-carry automatic rifles whenever and where ever?

My question is where do gun nuts draw the line? Like when it comes to open carry, what rules should it have? Should it have no rules? Like some dumb redneck carrying a gun into a bar til 2 AM is okay? Anyone should be allowed to do that?

As usual republicans struggle with nuance when it comes to political issues they are obsessed with. For example, cons will likely reply to this thread and start making the ridiculous claim that I think the 2nd amendment should be overturned. I don't. I also don't think semi-automatics should be illegal. I support laws that are designed to keep guns out of the hands of dangerous people. I also think open carry is ridiculous.

It doesn't really matter if I say all of that though. In their minds I'm a "snowflake" that is outraged over boys playing with toy guns. I'm nothing but a naive, pretentious "libtard" with a Gender's Studies degree who thinks guns are evil. Cliche is something easy for republicans to grasp I guess.

If you would pull your head out of your ass you would be able to answer your own questions dude. Here's a hint. Try reading what they say, and not interpreting it like a moron. Now I know that will be hard for you because you ARE a moron, but try.

 

[Crixus]

Guns = Good

Mine is nicer, the AR that is.

Mine needs a spa day. Both my best half, and my AR. May bring the latter in to the new millennium , or just get a new barrel. Dunno.

 

[danielpalos]

I'm aware. I asked you a new question. Try to keep up, pumpkin.

Your question has been answered by Scalia.

I know that you probably cannot read too good so you will likely never find the answer yourself in the Court's published decision, Pumpkin.

That's why I gave you nutshell explanations.

Scalia says very clearly in that opinion that as with all rights, the second is not unlimited.

Yes.....we know....you guys take that to mean you can legislate away gun rights as long as BB guns are still legal with strict government supervision........

we already limit gun rights to law abiding citizens...that is all we need......and if you break the law....you go to jail....done...

I take it to mean exactly what it says.
It's you folks who scream and holler your objections no matter what is suggested.

Wrong.....you guys suggest things that do nothing to actually stop criminals or mass shooters...we ooint that fact out...then you post dumb posts like this accusing us of opposing everything.......we state the reasons your ideas do not work...you cannot deny that so you lie about us.

yes; y'all object to becoming more well regulated. there is no excuse.

 

[BlackSand]

yes; y'all object to becoming more well regulated. there is no excuse.

Each state has a well-regulated militia ... So what's your excuse to think it is any different?

.

 

[danielpalos]

yes; y'all object to becoming more well regulated. there is no excuse.

Each state has a well-regulated militia ... So what's your excuse to think it is any different?

.

why are we wasting money on a federal War on Crime? should we ask Kentucky Colonels for leadership advice.

 

[BlackSand]

why are we wasting money on a federal War on Crime? should we ask Kentucky Colonels for leadership advice.

You have asked that exact question before ... And I have already answered it.
Since that wasn't a satisfactory answer for you ... I guess we can try another.

I have no idea why idiots put the federal government in charge anything the Constitution doesn't grant them the power to govern.
As for the Kentucky Colonels ... I'll take a bucket of 30 Hot Wings to go.

.

 

[danielpalos]

why are we wasting money on a federal War on Crime? should we ask Kentucky Colonels for leadership advice.

You have asked that exact question before ... And I have already answered it.
Since that wasn't a satisfactory answer for you ... I guess we can try another.

I have no idea why idiots put the federal government in charge anything the Constitution doesn't grant them the power to govern.
As for the Kentucky Colonels ... I'll take a bucket of 30 Hot Wings to go.

.

ok. i will ask that same question, from a different perspective, for the variety, so you won't get too bored.

Stop whining about taxes or the cost of social services for the poor; we don't need the cost of a federal War on Crime, for gun lovers to whine about.

 

[BlackSand]

ok. i will ask that same question, from a different perspective, for the variety, so you won't get too bored.

Stop whining about taxes or the cost of social services for the poor; we don't need the cost of a federal War on Crime, for gun lovers to whine about.

I don't whine about taxes ... And social services aren't covered in the 19 enumerated powers granted to the government in the Constitution either.

I mean ... I am sorry if you cannot understand that it isn't that difficult to identify what the problem is.
Perhaps you should look at it from a different point of view.

The Constitution was written from the stance of opportunity ... And actually doesn't allow anyone to be personally enriched through federal government legislative measures.
That includes the rich, the poor, businesses and individual states ... Our predecessors have absolutely bastardized the Constitution in order to suit their personal desires, enrich themselves and remain in power through the act of gift giving.

.

 

[danielpalos]

ok. i will ask that same question, from a different perspective, for the variety, so you won't get too bored.

Stop whining about taxes or the cost of social services for the poor; we don't need the cost of a federal War on Crime, for gun lovers to whine about.

I don't whine about taxes ... And social services aren't covered in the 19 enumerated powers granted to the government in the Constitution either.

I mean ... I am sorry if you cannot understand that it isn't that difficult to identify what the problem is.
Perhaps you should look at it from a different point of view.

The Constitution was written from the stance of opportunity ... And actually doesn't allow anyone to be enriched through federal government legislative measures.
That includes the rich, the poor, businesses and individual states ... Our predecessors have absolutely bastardized the Constitution in order to suit their personal desires, enrich themselves and remain in power through the act of gift giving.

.

yes, you do whine about taxes. and, providing for the general welfare is a social service. only the right whines about things without Just Cause, and claim to subscribe to at-will forms of employment.

 

[TheDude]

I think the real question is, why does OP's avatar honor critical thought when his words speak emotionally fragile? Perhaps it symbolizes a goal? If so, congratulations and good luck.

 

[danielpalos]

I think the real question is, why does OP's avatar honor critical thought when his words speak emotionally fragile? Perhaps it symbolizes a goal? If so, congratulations and good luck.

my only problem with gun lovers, is that they refuse to love their republic, in public, as much as they claim to love their guns, in public.

 

[BlackSand]

yes, you do whine about taxes. and, providing for the general welfare is a social service. only the right whines about things without Just Cause, and claim to subscribe to at-will forms of employment.

The fact you think the federal government owes you something they don't .. And has powers not granted to them in the Constitution ... Is your problem.
You can whine about it all you want ... But don't make the further mistake of thinking your desires amount to anything I would care enough about that they would cause me to whine.

.

 

[danielpalos]

yes, you do whine about taxes. and, providing for the general welfare is a social service. only the right whines about things without Just Cause, and claim to subscribe to at-will forms of employment.

The fact you think the federal government owes you something they don't .. And has powers not granted to them in the Constitution ... Is your problem.
You can whine about it all you want ... But don't make the further mistake of thinking your desires amount to anything I would care enough about that they would cause me to whine.

.

equal protection of the law is a reason for Government in the US.

 

[kaz]

Like is it in their fantasy for it to one day be legal for anyone to open-carry automatic rifles whenever and where ever?

My question is where do gun nuts draw the line? Like when it comes to open carry, what rules should it have? Should it have no rules? Like some dumb redneck carrying a gun into a bar til 2 AM is okay? Anyone should be allowed to do that?

As usual republicans struggle with nuance when it comes to political issues they are obsessed with. For example, cons will likely reply to this thread and start making the ridiculous claim that I think the 2nd amendment should be overturned. I don't. I also don't think semi-automatics should be illegal. I support laws that are designed to keep guns out of the hands of dangerous people. I also think open carry is ridiculous.

It doesn't really matter if I say all of that though. In their minds I'm a "snowflake" that is outraged over boys playing with toy guns. I'm nothing but a naive, pretentious "libtard" with a Gender's Studies degree who thinks guns are evil. Cliche is something easy for republicans to grasp I guess.

The limit is in the Constitution. Your rights can be infringed on only if you are able to limit them through due process of law. It's not that hard

 

[danielpalos]

Like is it in their fantasy for it to one day be legal for anyone to open-carry automatic rifles whenever and where ever?

My question is where do gun nuts draw the line? Like when it comes to open carry, what rules should it have? Should it have no rules? Like some dumb redneck carrying a gun into a bar til 2 AM is okay? Anyone should be allowed to do that?

As usual republicans struggle with nuance when it comes to political issues they are obsessed with. For example, cons will likely reply to this thread and start making the ridiculous claim that I think the 2nd amendment should be overturned. I don't. I also don't think semi-automatics should be illegal. I support laws that are designed to keep guns out of the hands of dangerous people. I also think open carry is ridiculous.

It doesn't really matter if I say all of that though. In their minds I'm a "snowflake" that is outraged over boys playing with toy guns. I'm nothing but a naive, pretentious "libtard" with a Gender's Studies degree who thinks guns are evil. Cliche is something easy for republicans to grasp I guess.

The limit is in the Constitution. Your rights can be infringed on only if you are able to limit them through due process of law. It's not that hard

the law of the land is subject to legislation.