Yeah, but you wouldn't understand why that's there.Doesn't it say "well regulated militia"?
I explained it in the other thread, if you'd care to check it out
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Yeah, but you wouldn't understand why that's there.Doesn't it say "well regulated militia"?
But since it's not... LOL. Just like we don't allow 12 year olds to run for President, the amendment sets up the parameters for the right to gun ownership not being infringed....Ideally the militia would already be created, and the Second Amendment would just be about keeping it up.
Ahh, conspiracy theories.. I knew we'd get to it eventually.It is the Freedom Haters who don't like the Second Amendment. It is always getting in the way of their gun ban agenda.
And if you've read my writing on the subject, I think it is almost criminally negligent to not have a gun in some places.That is incorrect. The Second Amendment protects the right of people to have guns for the private defense of their homes.
And I think a lot of Congressional Democrats are breathing a sigh of relief--in both Houses. Deep down, I think there are a lot of people in the White House who are breathing that sigh of relief as well.
Getting rid of the filibuster is a rubber stamp for one party rule. While I support some changes to the filibuster to where it would be a true stoppage of all business in the Senate and force a compromise of some sort, I do not support getting rid of it all together.
While its true the Republicans may do away with it when they get control of the Senate, you can't control what they do. And that would really suck. But all you can do is control your actions...it is best to leave the filibuster in place.
wow.And I think a lot of Congressional Democrats are breathing a sigh of relief--in both Houses. Deep down, I think there are a lot of people in the White House who are breathing that sigh of relief as well.
Getting rid of the filibuster is a rubber stamp for one party rule. While I support some changes to the filibuster to where it would be a true stoppage of all business in the Senate and force a compromise of some sort, I do not support getting rid of it all together.
While its true the Republicans may do away with it when they get control of the Senate, you can't control what they do. And that would really suck. But all you can do is control your actions...it is best to leave the filibuster in place.
The Second Amendment doesn't set up any parameters. It merely forbids infringement.But since it's not... LOL. Just like we don't allow 12 year olds to run for President, the amendment sets up the parameters for the right to gun ownership not being infringed....
No conspiracy theories. Progressives really do hate our freedom.Ahh, conspiracy theories.. I knew we'd get to it eventually.
show me where the Rs have used the filibuster more than the Ds.Well if the shoe were on the other foot, watch out. I agree , it is obstruction.
lord knows they are tryingYou really don't understand how a democratic republic really works, do you?
Just a hint for you, it isn't 'Mob Rule'.
True. It is a 2 part Amendment. There is no grey area there.No, the Second Amendment very clearly states that a well regulated militia is necessary.
Ideally the militia would already be created, and the Second Amendment would just be about keeping it up.
But in a situation where it does not currently exist, requiring its existence does mean creating it.
It is the Freedom Haters who don't like the Second Amendment. It is always getting in the way of their gun ban agenda.
That is incorrect. The Second Amendment protects the right of people to have guns for the private defense of their homes.
Lefties ALWAYS use Mob Rule. Anyone remember the 60's?lord knows they are trying