Do you notice how gun nuts never talk about any limits to gun ownership?

[Markle]

Are they cool with the prospect of people open carrying fully automatic wherever they go? After all, it’s the second amendment! Why is this not a thing?! Surely at GOP conventions those tough republican politicians would feel safe with knowing any ****** carrying a weapon around them is allowed to. Republicans’ idea of limiting gun violence is more guns after all. More guns the better!

If they do draw the line at these scenarios, then don’t they see how ridiculous it is to say any from of gun control is unconstitutional? Who are republicans to arbitrarily decide what level of gun laws are acceptable but democrats can’t? Hell, even their St. Scalia said gun control measures were constitutional.

Do you notice how kids have freedom of speech? You may pretend they don’t because what they choose to say can be punished by an adult in charge, but adults can be punished for what they say as well by adults in charge. After all, you can lose your job if you find yourself catcalling that new hot intern everyday.

All that matters when it comes to the first amendment and kids is that they can’t be charged with a crime for their speech. Now all this being said, are toddlers being denied their bill of rights by not being able to carry a gun?

This is discussed all the time, just not in your echo chamber. Btw this sword cuts both ways, gun ownership has been rising and gun laws on things like ARs have been reduced, yet gun crime drops. The Swiss are issued full autos and can walk around where they please with it on their shoulder, yet they are one of the safest countries on the planet. Those in your echo chamber have no response to this, which is why you never hear about it. You’re bringing up a topic that has been flushed out thousands of times on this message board, welcome to the party, everyone already left, but there might be some cold pizza left for you.

You happen to be grossly misinformed about the gun laws in Switzerland. You might want to check that out.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Do you notice how gun nuts never talk about any limits to gun ownership?

No.

Do you notice how gun nuts never talk about any limits to gun ownership?

No.

Then you’re not very observant or otherwise willfully ignorant.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Oh to be young again.

I remember when I had MY first beer.

You know I’m right.

You have not considered why the 2nd Amendment was created.

How The Second Amendment Prevents Tyranny

The Second Amendment was supposed to protect us from government by dispersing its coercive power among the people. We still adhere to that system today.

By Robert Tracinski

How The Second Amendment Works To Prevent Tyranny

Wrong.

The purpose of the Second Amendment is to codify an individual right to possess a firearm pursuant to lawful self-defense, unconnected with militia service – not to act in the capacity of law enforcement, not to fight crime, and certainly not to ‘overthrow’ a government incorrectly perceived to have become ‘tyrannical’:

‘Justice Scalia, writing in Heller, acknowledged that modern circumstances had severed the substantive protections of the Second Amendment from their original militia purpose, and by modern circumstances, he meant the preposterousness of insurrectionism. He said that "our standing army is the pride of our Nation" and stated (earlier in the opinion) that "it may be true that no amount of small arms could be useful against modern-day bombers and tanks."’

http://www.dorfonlaw.org/2013/04/the-resurrection-of-second-amendment.html

The Framers did not amend the Constitution with a provision authorizing its destruction.

View attachment 244880

The people in your Arena of Ideas are not very bright.

The idea is that with enough arms in the hands of citizen/patriots, a great Army, even one as powerful as that fielded by our own nation's government, would be deterred.

Every house would require the troops to shoot and kill or be killed or require war crimes to be committed daily by our boys and girls in green camp to clear out a single block and the resistance would be enough to deter an attempted power grab.

Remember, there is a difference between real life and video games.

The government would be unable to maintain power if they tried to make subjects out of us.

And the more brutal their use of power, the greater the resistance would become.

At some point the would-be tyrant would realize he could not win for losing.

The ‘idea’ is idiocy.

It’s the First Amendment that safeguards our rights and protected liberties, not the Second.

Tyranny is prevented by the right of the people to petition the government for a redress of grievances through the political and judicial process, by the Constitution and its case law, by our democratic institutions, and the rule of law.

If tyranny comes to America it will be at the behest of the people should they abandon those fundamental principles – tyranny sanctioned by the people the consequence of their fear, ignorance, hate, and stupidity, where how well-armed the people might be will be irrelevant.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Are they cool with the prospect of people open carrying fully automatic wherever they go? After all, it’s the second amendment! Why is this not a thing?! Surely at GOP conventions those tough republican politicians would feel safe with knowing any ****** carrying a weapon around them is allowed to. Republicans’ idea of limiting gun violence is more guns after all. More guns the better!

If they do draw the line at these scenarios, then don’t they see how ridiculous it is to say any from of gun control is unconstitutional? Who are republicans to arbitrarily decide what level of gun laws are acceptable but democrats can’t? Hell, even their St. Scalia said gun control measures were constitutional.

Do you notice how kids have freedom of speech? You may pretend they don’t because what they choose to say can be punished by an adult in charge, but adults can be punished for what they say as well by adults in charge. After all, you can lose your job if you find yourself catcalling that new hot intern everyday.

All that matters when it comes to the first amendment and kids is that they can’t be charged with a crime for their speech. Now all this being said, are toddlers being denied their bill of rights by not being able to carry a gun?

Oh really?

The problem with gun control is Socialists always take it too far.......just like they're taking abortion too far.

An unsurprisingly ignorant and ridiculous post.

‘Socialism’ has nothing to do with ‘gun control’ – this, and the reference to ‘abortion,’ is nothing more than inane demagoguery and a red herring fallacy.

And the courts determine when ‘gun control’ has gone ‘too far.’

The will of the people provides government the authority to regulate firearms consistent with Second Amendment jurisprudence.

The courts determine if firearm regulatory measures are repugnant to that case law, and invalidate them accordingly.

Current firearm regulatory measures are consequently perfectly Constitutional, having not gone ‘too far’ until the courts rule otherwise, or the people see fit to repeal those measures through the political process.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

My friend who is a republican, showed me a pic of her grandchild, a 7 year old dressed in fatigues, with a weapon, a rifle. She thought it was cute, I thought it was disgusting.

You should have showed her a picture of a cute 7 year old male child being transgendered and in a dress. That would have evened things up.

And when conservatives aren’t exhibiting their ignorance and stupidity, they’re exhibiting their hate and bigotry – this post being one of many examples.

 

[Pumpkin Row]

Are they cool with the prospect of people open carrying fully automatic wherever they go? After all, it’s the second amendment! Why is this not a thing?! Surely at GOP conventions those tough republican politicians would feel safe with knowing any ****** carrying a weapon around them is allowed to. Republicans’ idea of limiting gun violence is more guns after all. More guns the better!

I am, but the GOP is not. You'll notice that their darling NRA has supported every gun regulation since their inception.

This argument is also a strawman, you're making it with the assumption that anyone with a gun intends to just shoot up any side walk, or anyone that makes them angry, when there are far fewer violent people than logical ones. If everyone were openly carrying weapons, potential criminals would associate higher risk with hurting anyone.

If they do draw the line at these scenarios, then don’t they see how ridiculous it is to say any from of gun control is unconstitutional? Who are republicans to arbitrarily decide what level of gun laws are acceptable but democrats can’t? Hell, even their St. Scalia said gun control measures were constitutional.

Who is the government to arbitrarily decide how we can and can't associate? Who is the government to declare themselves special, in the sense that they have rights we do not? Who is the government to arbitrarily rob, kidnap, and murder people for violating their minotaur's maze of numerous laws which THEY don't even keep track of or abide by?

Mentioning Scalia is just an appeal to authority fallacy.

Do you notice how kids have freedom of speech? You may pretend they don’t because what they choose to say can be punished by an adult in charge, but adults can be punished for what they say as well by adults in charge. After all, you can lose your job if you find yourself catcalling that new hot intern everyday.

People have those rights regardless of whether the government or any "authority" figure recognizes it, as having a right doesn't prevent people from attempting to infringe on them, or react negatively to your usage of those rights. For example, the government simply claims you don't have specific rights, or there's limits to the rights they recognize, and they therefor initiate force against you for using those rights in a way they don't like. Those rights still exist, the government just initiates force for your usage of those rights.

All that matters when it comes to the first amendment and kids is that they can’t be charged with a crime for their speech. Now all this being said, are toddlers being denied their bill of rights by not being able to carry a gun?

This statement here shows that you have no idea what rights are. As explained above, everyone has individual rights, the bill of rights is only the rights which the government claims to recognize, despite infringing on them regularly. Those rights also exist for kids, the question is whether or not their parents, for example, allow them to use those rights.

 

[22lcidw]

My friend who is a republican, showed me a pic of her grandchild, a 7 year old dressed in fatigues, with a weapon, a rifle. She thought it was cute, I thought it was disgusting.

You should have showed her a picture of a cute 7 year old male child being transgendered and in a dress. That would have evened things up.

And when conservatives aren’t exhibiting their ignorance and stupidity, they’re exhibiting their hate and bigotry – this post being one of many examples.

Of course you see nothing wrong with that. You care not for children and the aged as we can see just to start. Spouting the Saul Alinsky hate spiel as part of the agenda.

 

[Chuz Life]

Are they cool with the prospect of people open carrying fully automatic wherever they go? After all, it’s the second amendment! Why is this not a thing?! Surely at GOP conventions those tough republican politicians would feel safe with knowing any ****** carrying a weapon around them is allowed to. Republicans’ idea of limiting gun violence is more guns after all. More guns the better!

If they do draw the line at these scenarios, then don’t they see how ridiculous it is to say any from of gun control is unconstitutional? Who are republicans to arbitrarily decide what level of gun laws are acceptable but democrats can’t? Hell, even their St. Scalia said gun control measures were constitutional.

Do you notice how kids have freedom of speech? You may pretend they don’t because what they choose to say can be punished by an adult in charge, but adults can be punished for what they say as well by adults in charge. After all, you can lose your job if you find yourself catcalling that new hot intern everyday.

All that matters when it comes to the first amendment and kids is that they can’t be charged with a crime for their speech. Now all this being said, are toddlers being denied their bill of rights by not being able to carry a gun?

Oh really?

The problem with gun control is Socialists always take it too far.......just like they're taking abortion too far.

An unsurprisingly ignorant and ridiculous post.

‘Socialism’ has nothing to do with ‘gun control’ – this, and the reference to ‘abortion,’ is nothing more than inane demagoguery and a red herring fallacy.

And the courts determine when ‘gun control’ has gone ‘too far.’

The will of the people provides government the authority to regulate firearms consistent with Second Amendment jurisprudence.

The courts determine if firearm regulatory measures are repugnant to that case law, and invalidate them accordingly.

Current firearm regulatory measures are consequently perfectly Constitutional, having not gone ‘too far’ until the courts rule otherwise, or the people see fit to repeal those measures through the political process.

https://pics.me.me/hey-libtard-why-dont-you-shut-the-****-up-and-29819432.png

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Are they cool with the prospect of people open carrying fully automatic wherever they go? After all, it’s the second amendment! Why is this not a thing?! Surely at GOP conventions those tough republican politicians would feel safe with knowing any ****** carrying a weapon around them is allowed to. Republicans’ idea of limiting gun violence is more guns after all. More guns the better!

If they do draw the line at these scenarios, then don’t they see how ridiculous it is to say any from of gun control is unconstitutional? Who are republicans to arbitrarily decide what level of gun laws are acceptable but democrats can’t? Hell, even their St. Scalia said gun control measures were constitutional.

Do you notice how kids have freedom of speech? You may pretend they don’t because what they choose to say can be punished by an adult in charge, but adults can be punished for what they say as well by adults in charge. After all, you can lose your job if you find yourself catcalling that new hot intern everyday.

All that matters when it comes to the first amendment and kids is that they can’t be charged with a crime for their speech. Now all this being said, are toddlers being denied their bill of rights by not being able to carry a gun?

Oh really?

The problem with gun control is Socialists always take it too far.......just like they're taking abortion too far.

I advocate "Common Sense Gun Regulations"

Your "common sense" may not be my common sense. Therefore, we apply the 2nd Amendment.

Wrong.

One applies Second Amendment case law – something you and most others on the right have nothing but contempt for.

 

[Aponi]

Are they cool with the prospect of people open carrying fully automatic wherever they go? After all, it’s the second amendment! Why is this not a thing?! Surely at GOP conventions those tough republican politicians would feel safe with knowing any ****** carrying a weapon around them is allowed to. Republicans’ idea of limiting gun violence is more guns after all. More guns the better!

If they do draw the line at these scenarios, then don’t they see how ridiculous it is to say any from of gun control is unconstitutional? Who are republicans to arbitrarily decide what level of gun laws are acceptable but democrats can’t? Hell, even their St. Scalia said gun control measures were constitutional.

Do you notice how kids have freedom of speech? You may pretend they don’t because what they choose to say can be punished by an adult in charge, but adults can be punished for what they say as well by adults in charge. After all, you can lose your job if you find yourself catcalling that new hot intern everyday.

All that matters when it comes to the first amendment and kids is that they can’t be charged with a crime for their speech. Now all this being said, are toddlers being denied their bill of rights by not being able to carry a gun?

First off pin head fully automatic weapons require a special permit ia tax stamp ssued by the atf .
It takes a year to get approved if your lucky. It cost you 200.00 .
O in case you didnt know only full auto guns issued before 1986 can be purchased.
Also pin head they are expensive very expensive.
For example a m16 in good condition low round count will cost you around 30 grand.
And people dont carry themnaround in public.
You watch to many hollywood movies.
The ammount of crimes commited by full auto weapons legally owned csn be counted on one hand.
We are owners of class 2 weapons and devices .

Full auto weapons that are legally owned meat head are almost all long guns . and cost on the 5 diget ammonnt .
Now illegally converted guns are usually owned by gang bangers suck as the gangs in chicago and la such as the bloods crips ms 13 you know liberal democrats you know drug dealer types .

 

[mudwhistle]

Are they cool with the prospect of people open carrying fully automatic wherever they go? After all, it’s the second amendment! Why is this not a thing?! Surely at GOP conventions those tough republican politicians would feel safe with knowing any ****** carrying a weapon around them is allowed to. Republicans’ idea of limiting gun violence is more guns after all. More guns the better!

If they do draw the line at these scenarios, then don’t they see how ridiculous it is to say any from of gun control is unconstitutional? Who are republicans to arbitrarily decide what level of gun laws are acceptable but democrats can’t? Hell, even their St. Scalia said gun control measures were constitutional.

Do you notice how kids have freedom of speech? You may pretend they don’t because what they choose to say can be punished by an adult in charge, but adults can be punished for what they say as well by adults in charge. After all, you can lose your job if you find yourself catcalling that new hot intern everyday.

All that matters when it comes to the first amendment and kids is that they can’t be charged with a crime for their speech. Now all this being said, are toddlers being denied their bill of rights by not being able to carry a gun?

Oh really?

The problem with gun control is Socialists always take it too far.......just like they're taking abortion too far.

I advocate "Common Sense Gun Regulations" and the State of Colorado is very near to that point. It only has one more to go to reach that and that should happen some time this year. Does that make me a socialists? Does that make me a Communist? Am I advocating that we come and confiscate all your guns?

Well I might advocate confiscating all your guns if you become a liability and direct safety to the public. And then, only your guns, not anyone elses. That is the last piece of law that will go into affect this year. Do the guns laws here keep me from walking in and purchasing a gun in about 15 minutes if I want one? Does it limit me to buying 500 rounds of ammo at a time once a week? Do I need to have special licenses and regulations to own, possess, transport, etc. the guns? Am I required to Register myself for anything other than weapons on the 1934 Firearms Act? The answer is No to all of these. I can have the gun or my choice to protect my home, I can have the gun of my choice for hunting, I can ...... That list goes on and on. You keep telling me that I should feel threatened. Funny, I don't feel threatened. Well, I do feel a little threatened by you so I guess I need to stay armed just in case. Never know when some people with some strange ideas may feel the need to do something really stupid.

Quote: "Well, I do feel a little threatened by you..."​

Daryl, mudwhistle happens to support the US Constitution and is the best of good American men. He is also a gifted defender of Constitutional rights, and he will not allow experimentalists in the DNC destroy the very realistic world we live in. You'll never out-think Mr. mudwhistle, nor realize what a debate truly is if you keep up irrational feelings that lack merit of any kind. Toodles.

I can tell I won this round. I hit quite a sore spot. Does it make you want to field strip your weapons? Doesn't do a thing for me.

I think you've lost. You said that if I (or anyone else) becomes a threat to you....you will come and get my guns.
But what do you consider to be a threat to you today? Will it change when some media outlet decides to change your mind?
Is being White a threat to you?
Is being a Christian a threat to you?
Is being an American who loves his country a threat to you?
If not, how easily will the left change your mind and create some fear or rage against me and anyone like me?
You appear to be more afraid of the lawful than the unlawful....for gun laws only effect those who abide by the law.

 

[mudwhistle]

Are they cool with the prospect of people open carrying fully automatic wherever they go? After all, it’s the second amendment! Why is this not a thing?! Surely at GOP conventions those tough republican politicians would feel safe with knowing any ****** carrying a weapon around them is allowed to. Republicans’ idea of limiting gun violence is more guns after all. More guns the better!

If they do draw the line at these scenarios, then don’t they see how ridiculous it is to say any from of gun control is unconstitutional? Who are republicans to arbitrarily decide what level of gun laws are acceptable but democrats can’t? Hell, even their St. Scalia said gun control measures were constitutional.

Do you notice how kids have freedom of speech? You may pretend they don’t because what they choose to say can be punished by an adult in charge, but adults can be punished for what they say as well by adults in charge. After all, you can lose your job if you find yourself catcalling that new hot intern everyday.

All that matters when it comes to the first amendment and kids is that they can’t be charged with a crime for their speech. Now all this being said, are toddlers being denied their bill of rights by not being able to carry a gun?

Oh really?

The problem with gun control is Socialists always take it too far.......just like they're taking abortion too far.

An unsurprisingly ignorant and ridiculous post.

‘Socialism’ has nothing to do with ‘gun control’ – this, and the reference to ‘abortion,’ is nothing more than inane demagoguery and a red herring fallacy.

And the courts determine when ‘gun control’ has gone ‘too far.’

The will of the people provides government the authority to regulate firearms consistent with Second Amendment jurisprudence.

The courts determine if firearm regulatory measures are repugnant to that case law, and invalidate them accordingly.

Current firearm regulatory measures are consequently perfectly Constitutional, having not gone ‘too far’ until the courts rule otherwise, or the people see fit to repeal those measures through the political process.

Hogwash.
I'm sure once Socialism kicks in and everyone finds out the evils involved they will come for our guns......and the government will tell us what "THE PEOPLE" see fit to do to us through the courts.

 

[sparky]

Tyrants exist only in the TDS-riddled mind, Sparky.

Tyrants exist from one end of this rock to the other Beaut, most of the time those populations cheerleaded on the very elements that subjugated them

~S~

 

[Polishprince]

Are they cool with the prospect of people open carrying fully automatic wherever they go? After all, it’s the second amendment! Why is this not a thing?! Surely at GOP conventions those tough republican politicians would feel safe with knowing any ****** carrying a weapon around them is allowed to. Republicans’ idea of limiting gun violence is more guns after all. More guns the better!

If they do draw the line at these scenarios, then don’t they see how ridiculous it is to say any from of gun control is unconstitutional? Who are republicans to arbitrarily decide what level of gun laws are acceptable but democrats can’t? Hell, even their St. Scalia said gun control measures were constitutional.

Do you notice how kids have freedom of speech? You may pretend they don’t because what they choose to say can be punished by an adult in charge, but adults can be punished for what they say as well by adults in charge. After all, you can lose your job if you find yourself catcalling that new hot intern everyday.

All that matters when it comes to the first amendment and kids is that they can’t be charged with a crime for their speech. Now all this being said, are toddlers being denied their bill of rights by not being able to carry a gun?

There are limits to gun ownership, and Americans don't complain.

Gun control is about controlling the access of Law Abiders to firearms. Criminals will still have them. Look at places like Chicago.

Just last week, some criminals reportedly attacked Megastar Jussie Smollett on the streets in the middle of the night , beating him senseless threatening to lynch him and putting a noose around his neck. Had Mr. Smollett been armed, the event would not have turned out so tragic.

 

[pismoe]

Are they cool with the prospect of people open carrying fully automatic wherever they go? After all, it’s the second amendment! Why is this not a thing?! Surely at GOP conventions those tough republican politicians would feel safe with knowing any ****** carrying a weapon around them is allowed to. Republicans’ idea of limiting gun violence is more guns after all. More guns the better!

If they do draw the line at these scenarios, then don’t they see how ridiculous it is to say any from of gun control is unconstitutional? Who are republicans to arbitrarily decide what level of gun laws are acceptable but democrats can’t? Hell, even their St. Scalia said gun control measures were constitutional.

Do you notice how kids have freedom of speech? You may pretend they don’t because what they choose to say can be punished by an adult in charge, but adults can be punished for what they say as well by adults in charge. After all, you can lose your job if you find yourself catcalling that new hot intern everyday.

All that matters when it comes to the first amendment and kids is that they can’t be charged with a crime for their speech. Now all this being said, are toddlers being denied their bill of rights by not being able to carry a gun?

There are limits to gun ownership, and Americans don't complain.

Gun control is about controlling the access of Law Abiders to firearms. Criminals will still have them. Look at places like Chicago.

Just last week, some criminals reportedly attacked Megastar Jussie Smollett on the streets in the middle of the night , beating him senseless threatening to lynch him and putting a noose around his neck. Had Mr. Smollett been armed, the event would not have turned out so tragic.

----------------------------------- assuming that 'smollet' isn't a liar and just another race hoaxer PPrince .

 

[Polishprince]

Are they cool with the prospect of people open carrying fully automatic wherever they go? After all, it’s the second amendment! Why is this not a thing?! Surely at GOP conventions those tough republican politicians would feel safe with knowing any ****** carrying a weapon around them is allowed to. Republicans’ idea of limiting gun violence is more guns after all. More guns the better!

If they do draw the line at these scenarios, then don’t they see how ridiculous it is to say any from of gun control is unconstitutional? Who are republicans to arbitrarily decide what level of gun laws are acceptable but democrats can’t? Hell, even their St. Scalia said gun control measures were constitutional.

Do you notice how kids have freedom of speech? You may pretend they don’t because what they choose to say can be punished by an adult in charge, but adults can be punished for what they say as well by adults in charge. After all, you can lose your job if you find yourself catcalling that new hot intern everyday.

All that matters when it comes to the first amendment and kids is that they can’t be charged with a crime for their speech. Now all this being said, are toddlers being denied their bill of rights by not being able to carry a gun?

There are limits to gun ownership, and Americans don't complain.

Gun control is about controlling the access of Law Abiders to firearms. Criminals will still have them. Look at places like Chicago.

Just last week, some criminals reportedly attacked Megastar Jussie Smollett on the streets in the middle of the night , beating him senseless threatening to lynch him and putting a noose around his neck. Had Mr. Smollett been armed, the event would not have turned out so tragic.

----------------------------------- assuming that 'smollet' isn't a liar and just another race hoaxer PPrince .

True enough regarding Mr. Smollett. But the advice to allow law abiding individuals the right to bear arms would help prevent all of the real assaults occurring in Chicago in the middle of the night.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

Are they cool with the prospect of people open carrying fully automatic wherever they go? After all, it’s the second amendment! Why is this not a thing?! Surely at GOP conventions those tough republican politicians would feel safe with knowing any ****** carrying a weapon around them is allowed to. Republicans’ idea of limiting gun violence is more guns after all. More guns the better!

If they do draw the line at these scenarios, then don’t they see how ridiculous it is to say any from of gun control is unconstitutional? Who are republicans to arbitrarily decide what level of gun laws are acceptable but democrats can’t? Hell, even their St. Scalia said gun control measures were constitutional.

Do you notice how kids have freedom of speech? You may pretend they don’t because what they choose to say can be punished by an adult in charge, but adults can be punished for what they say as well by adults in charge. After all, you can lose your job if you find yourself catcalling that new hot intern everyday.

All that matters when it comes to the first amendment and kids is that they can’t be charged with a crime for their speech. Now all this being said, are toddlers being denied their bill of rights by not being able to carry a gun?

This is discussed all the time, just not in your echo chamber. Btw this sword cuts both ways, gun ownership has been rising and gun laws on things like ARs have been reduced, yet gun crime drops. The Swiss are issued full autos and can walk around where they please with it on their shoulder, yet they are one of the safest countries on the planet. Those in your echo chamber have no response to this, which is why you never hear about it. You’re bringing up a topic that has been flushed out thousands of times on this message board, welcome to the party, everyone already left, but there might be some cold pizza left for you.

The Swiss do NOT allow full autos to be taken home. They only allow semi auto and bolt action to be signed out at the time of separation. And then only if you do the right paperwork. What is happening today, more and more are electing not to apply to take those weapons home with them. But there are abosutely NO full auto weapons allowed in a Civilians hands without some really hairy paperwork and background checks as well as Registrations.

Recent legislation that they were basically forced into by the EU. 2010 I believe it was. It was still the safest country then, nothing changed after. So there goes that argument.

You are talking about the Schengen Agreement signed in 2008. But it actually goes back to 1999 under the Amsterdam Treaty that Switzerland is a signatory. But all of these only have to do with Border Crossings, not gun control.

What you are leaving out is that the first 3 months (the only compulsory time period) all weapons trained on and used in the Swiss Military are all semi auto. No full auto or 3 shot burst weapons are allowed. These are the weapons that the separating Swiss that can qualify can take home AFTER they go through the regulation and background check procedure. These days, most don't bother. The number of guns in the Swiss Homes have been decreasing each year. It's been like this for decades. One of the reasons that gun violence has gone down in Switzerland is that the gun does not have the cult status that it does have in the US.

What you call “gun cult status”, which is just enjoying the sport of shooting, is still alive and well for the Swiss. It’s especially prevalent in the countryside. Sure less prevelant and declining in the cities, which is natural. But for many Swiss, shooting is more of a regular hobby than it is for probably most gun owners in america. Saying there’s no “gun cult”, whatever that is, is just an incorrect mischaracterization, and a silly argument even if there was some truth to it.

Gun crime has been declining worldwide. It’s been declining for the US as well, despite ownership and gun purchases rising. The trick is to look for the correlation BEFORE and AFTER gun control implementation. To which the correlation, if anything, points in the opposite direction. Switzerland was still essientially the safest place on the planet back when they were all issued full auto sigs.

The 2nd amendment is the decentralization of force. Governments, who are consistently the largest perpetrators of murder throughout human history (not to forget the only and consistent vessels of mass oppression), have a much harder time doing that when they do not have a monopoly of force. Things might seem fine and dandy now, but that’s a naive, short term view to hold.

Yet you deny all the other factors that are the real contributors to the decline. Yes, there are more guns but there aren't any more gun owners. Just more guns owned by the same owners. Since that hasn't changed, what else has changed? You never discuss those. You just poke fun and call them lies because it's obviously "More Guns".

 

[Daryl Hunt]

Are they cool with the prospect of people open carrying fully automatic wherever they go? After all, it’s the second amendment! Why is this not a thing?! Surely at GOP conventions those tough republican politicians would feel safe with knowing any ****** carrying a weapon around them is allowed to. Republicans’ idea of limiting gun violence is more guns after all. More guns the better!

If they do draw the line at these scenarios, then don’t they see how ridiculous it is to say any from of gun control is unconstitutional? Who are republicans to arbitrarily decide what level of gun laws are acceptable but democrats can’t? Hell, even their St. Scalia said gun control measures were constitutional.

Do you notice how kids have freedom of speech? You may pretend they don’t because what they choose to say can be punished by an adult in charge, but adults can be punished for what they say as well by adults in charge. After all, you can lose your job if you find yourself catcalling that new hot intern everyday.

All that matters when it comes to the first amendment and kids is that they can’t be charged with a crime for their speech. Now all this being said, are toddlers being denied their bill of rights by not being able to carry a gun?

Oh really?

The problem with gun control is Socialists always take it too far.......just like they're taking abortion too far.

I advocate "Common Sense Gun Regulations" and the State of Colorado is very near to that point. It only has one more to go to reach that and that should happen some time this year. Does that make me a socialists? Does that make me a Communist? Am I advocating that we come and confiscate all your guns?

Well I might advocate confiscating all your guns if you become a liability and direct safety to the public. And then, only your guns, not anyone elses. That is the last piece of law that will go into affect this year. Do the guns laws here keep me from walking in and purchasing a gun in about 15 minutes if I want one? Does it limit me to buying 500 rounds of ammo at a time once a week? Do I need to have special licenses and regulations to own, possess, transport, etc. the guns? Am I required to Register myself for anything other than weapons on the 1934 Firearms Act? The answer is No to all of these. I can have the gun or my choice to protect my home, I can have the gun of my choice for hunting, I can ...... That list goes on and on. You keep telling me that I should feel threatened. Funny, I don't feel threatened. Well, I do feel a little threatened by you so I guess I need to stay armed just in case. Never know when some people with some strange ideas may feel the need to do something really stupid.

Quote: "Well, I do feel a little threatened by you..."​

Daryl, mudwhistle happens to support the US Constitution and is the best of good American men. He is also a gifted defender of Constitutional rights, and he will not allow experimentalists in the DNC destroy the very realistic world we live in. You'll never out-think Mr. mudwhistle, nor realize what a debate truly is if you keep up irrational feelings that lack merit of any kind. Toodles.

I can tell I won this round. I hit quite a sore spot. Does it make you want to field strip your weapons? Doesn't do a thing for me.

I think you've lost. You said that if I (or anyone else) becomes a threat to you....you will come and get my guns.
But what do you consider to be a threat to you today? Will it change when some media outlet decides to change your mind?
Is being White a threat to you?
Is being a Christian a threat to you?
Is being an American who loves his country a threat to you?
If not, how easily will the left change your mind and create some fear or rage against me and anyone like me?
You appear to be more afraid of the lawful than the unlawful....for gun laws only effect those who abide by the law.

No, YOU are saying that if anyone becomes a threat to me that I will come and get your guns. You leave out some pretty good qualifiers so that you can lie your way out of it. As always, you say what I think. Wow, that's one pretty good crystal ball you have there. Does it come in Chartrus? You lost in the courts. You lost in the legaslatives, you lost at the ballots. Let's face it, you are one lost puppy. So keep lying and we keep doing our thing as a majority making things safe for us. If you end up being safer in the process then we really don't care. But if you become a danger, we do care and will legally react to you. But you will continue to lose because you are a loser and a liar. And work on those debating skills.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

Are they cool with the prospect of people open carrying fully automatic wherever they go? After all, it’s the second amendment! Why is this not a thing?! Surely at GOP conventions those tough republican politicians would feel safe with knowing any ****** carrying a weapon around them is allowed to. Republicans’ idea of limiting gun violence is more guns after all. More guns the better!

If they do draw the line at these scenarios, then don’t they see how ridiculous it is to say any from of gun control is unconstitutional? Who are republicans to arbitrarily decide what level of gun laws are acceptable but democrats can’t? Hell, even their St. Scalia said gun control measures were constitutional.

Do you notice how kids have freedom of speech? You may pretend they don’t because what they choose to say can be punished by an adult in charge, but adults can be punished for what they say as well by adults in charge. After all, you can lose your job if you find yourself catcalling that new hot intern everyday.

All that matters when it comes to the first amendment and kids is that they can’t be charged with a crime for their speech. Now all this being said, are toddlers being denied their bill of rights by not being able to carry a gun?

Oh really?

The problem with gun control is Socialists always take it too far.......just like they're taking abortion too far.

An unsurprisingly ignorant and ridiculous post.

‘Socialism’ has nothing to do with ‘gun control’ – this, and the reference to ‘abortion,’ is nothing more than inane demagoguery and a red herring fallacy.

And the courts determine when ‘gun control’ has gone ‘too far.’

The will of the people provides government the authority to regulate firearms consistent with Second Amendment jurisprudence.

The courts determine if firearm regulatory measures are repugnant to that case law, and invalidate them accordingly.

Current firearm regulatory measures are consequently perfectly Constitutional, having not gone ‘too far’ until the courts rule otherwise, or the people see fit to repeal those measures through the political process.

Hogwash.
I'm sure once Socialism kicks in and everyone finds out the evils involved they will come for our guns......and the government will tell us what "THE PEOPLE" see fit to do to us through the courts.

And when is the exact date of that going to happen again? You are so sure of your prediction, I am sure you also have the exact date as well. Share it with us. It's been like that dude with the robes standing on the street corner with the sign, "The End is Near".

 

[mudwhistle]

Oh really?

The problem with gun control is Socialists always take it too far.......just like they're taking abortion too far.

I advocate "Common Sense Gun Regulations" and the State of Colorado is very near to that point. It only has one more to go to reach that and that should happen some time this year. Does that make me a socialists? Does that make me a Communist? Am I advocating that we come and confiscate all your guns?

Well I might advocate confiscating all your guns if you become a liability and direct safety to the public. And then, only your guns, not anyone elses. That is the last piece of law that will go into affect this year. Do the guns laws here keep me from walking in and purchasing a gun in about 15 minutes if I want one? Does it limit me to buying 500 rounds of ammo at a time once a week? Do I need to have special licenses and regulations to own, possess, transport, etc. the guns? Am I required to Register myself for anything other than weapons on the 1934 Firearms Act? The answer is No to all of these. I can have the gun or my choice to protect my home, I can have the gun of my choice for hunting, I can ...... That list goes on and on. You keep telling me that I should feel threatened. Funny, I don't feel threatened. Well, I do feel a little threatened by you so I guess I need to stay armed just in case. Never know when some people with some strange ideas may feel the need to do something really stupid.

Quote: "Well, I do feel a little threatened by you..."​

Daryl, mudwhistle happens to support the US Constitution and is the best of good American men. He is also a gifted defender of Constitutional rights, and he will not allow experimentalists in the DNC destroy the very realistic world we live in. You'll never out-think Mr. mudwhistle, nor realize what a debate truly is if you keep up irrational feelings that lack merit of any kind. Toodles.

I can tell I won this round. I hit quite a sore spot. Does it make you want to field strip your weapons? Doesn't do a thing for me.

I think you've lost. You said that if I (or anyone else) becomes a threat to you....you will come and get my guns.
But what do you consider to be a threat to you today? Will it change when some media outlet decides to change your mind?
Is being White a threat to you?
Is being a Christian a threat to you?
Is being an American who loves his country a threat to you?
If not, how easily will the left change your mind and create some fear or rage against me and anyone like me?
You appear to be more afraid of the lawful than the unlawful....for gun laws only effect those who abide by the law.

No, YOU are saying that if anyone becomes a threat to me that I will come and get your guns. You leave out some pretty good qualifiers so that you can lie your way out of it. As always, you say what I think. Wow, that's one pretty good crystal ball you have there. Does it come in Chartrus? You lost in the courts. You lost in the legaslatives, you lost at the ballots. Let's face it, you are one lost puppy. So keep lying and we keep doing our thing as a majority making things safe for us. If you end up being safer in the process then we really don't care. But if you become a danger, we do care and will legally react to you. But you will continue to lose because you are a loser and a liar. And work on those debating skills.

Yeah. Debating skills.
Trying to win a battle of wits with you is like fighting an unarmed man.
You are so transparent it's ridiculous.
You spell out exactly what you plan on doing and when I tell it to you in practical terms what you're saying you tell me I'm a liar.
I'm not living in that fantasy you live in. I live in the real world.
I remember the days when people like you were extremely rare, but unfortunately the left seems to breed them or manufacture them.
Silly, gullible, airheads that want to live like a bunch of sheep.