It's the Guns, Stupid

Apr 20, 2007 Read more: Truthdig 103,342

“And that's the end of the issue”

Why do we have the same futile argument every time there is a mass killing? Advocates of gun control try to open a discussion about whether more reasonable weapons statutes might reduce the number of violent ... via Truthdig

Read more
Teaman

Mount Holly, NJ

#107272 May 10, 2013
Ahomana wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes or it could be like LA...they kept them out didn't they?...if they did, we should find out how they did it and mirror it?...I am sure we have the numbers and they would be stuffed if we didn't buy what they are selling...
Who kept who out?
spocko

Oakland, CA

#107273 May 10, 2013
anti-state wrote:
<quoted text>
minorities don't count in a democracy and that is why i don't like them. America is meant to be a constitutional republic but it is far removed from it's founding principles. even uneducated people in afghanistan made guns to fight the ussr back in the 80's so how much better can we do? The second amendment is meant to protect us from big brother and believe me we need it. a right is non negotiable and is not the same as a privilege. you are a hopeless brainless statists that lacks the ability of critical thinks which involves common sense.
Oh really, you can't differentiate between a political minority and a fanatical minority demanding more guns and less regulation?

“Shall NOT be infringed!”

Since: Apr 13

San Jose, CA.

#107274 May 10, 2013
spocko wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh really, you can't differentiate between a political minority and a fanatical minority demanding more guns and less regulation?
"Constitutional rights cannot be denied simply because of hostility to their assertions and exercise; vindication of conceded Constitutional Rights cannot be made dependent upon any theory that it is less expensive to deny them than to afford them."--Watson v. Memphis, 181 N.C. 574, 107 S.E. 222, at 224 (1921).

"Personal liberty, or the Right to enjoyment of life and liberty, is one of the fundamental or natural Rights, which has been protected by its inclusion as a guarantee in the various constitutions, which is not derived from, or dependent on, the U.S. Constitution, which may not be submitted to a vote and may not depend on the outcome of an election. It is one of the most sacred and valuable Rights, as sacred as the Right to private property ... and is regarded as inalienable."--16 C.J.S., Constitutional Law, Sect.202, p.987.

"It is the peculiar value of a written constitution that it places in unchanging form limitations upon the legislation and thus gives a permanence and stability to popular government which otherwise would be lacking."--Muller v. Oregon, 208 U.S. 412.
Teaman

Mount Holly, NJ

#107275 May 10, 2013
spocko wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh really, you can't differentiate between a political minority and a fanatical minority demanding more guns and less regulation?
A minority is a minority. A constitutional republic has the bill of rights protecting the minority from the majority. That is, if the younger folks don't surrender their rights for "stuff".

I didn't think I would live to see the day Americans would be arguing for more government and higher taxes. I never thought liberty would be a hard sell.

“Shall NOT be infringed!”

Since: Apr 13

San Jose, CA.

#107277 May 10, 2013
spocko wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh really, you can't differentiate between a political minority and a fanatical minority demanding more guns and less regulation?
It is quite apparent that you are woefully ignorant of history:

"Sir, I am obliged to pass by, for want of time other grave and dangerous infractions and usurpations of the President since the fourth of March. I only allude casually to the quartering of soldiers in private houses without the consent of the owners, and without any manner having been prescribed by law; to the subversion in a part at least of Maryland of her own State government and the authorities under it: to the censorship over the telegraph, and the infringement repeatedly, in one or more of the States, of the right of the people to keep and to bear arms for their defense. But if all these things, I ask, have been done in the first two months after the commencement of this war, and by men not military chieftains and unused to arbitrary power, what may we not expect to see in three years, and by the successful heroes of the fight? Sir, the power and rights of the States and the people, and of their Representatives, have been usurped; the sanctity of the private house and of private property has been invaded; and the liberty of the person wantonly and wickedly stricken down; free speech, too, has been repeatedly denied; arid all this under the plea of necessity. Sir, the right of petition will follow next--nay, it has already been shaken; the freedom of the press will soon fall after it; and let me whisper in your ear, that there will be few to mourn over its loss, unless, indeed, its ancient high and honorable character shall be rescued and redeemed from its present reckless mendacity and degradation. Freedom of religion will yield too, at last, amid the exultant shouts millions, who have seen its holy temples defiled and its white robes of a former innocency trampled now under the polluting hoofs of an ambitious and faithless or fanatical clergy. Meantime national banks, bankrupt laws, a vast and permanent public debt, high tariffs, heavy direct tax[a]tion, enormous expenditure, gigantic and stupendous peculation, anarchy first and a strong government afterwards, no more State lines, no more State governments, and a consolidated monarchy or vast centralized military despotism, must all follow in the history of the future, as in the history of the past they have, centuries ago, been written."--Mr. Clement L. Vallandigham, July 10, 1861. U.S. House of Representatives, The Congressional Globe Pg. 60.
GoGoBar

Chachoengsao, Thailand

#107278 May 10, 2013
Teaman wrote:
<quoted text>
A minority is a minority. A constitutional republic has the bill of rights protecting the minority from the majority. That is, if the younger folks don't surrender their rights for "stuff".
I didn't think I would live to see the day Americans would be arguing for more government and higher taxes. I never thought liberty would be a hard sell.
If temporary tax cuts arent "stuff" what is.

It set the precedent, became permanent.

The rest follows.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#107279 May 10, 2013
GunShow1 wrote:
"Sir,
Vikings: Spam spam spam spam...

PS: your hero was an avowed racist and opposed the liberation of slaves.

“Shall NOT be infringed!”

Since: Apr 13

San Jose, CA.

#107280 May 10, 2013
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
Vikings: Spam spam spam spam...
PS: your hero was an avowed racist and opposed the liberation of slaves.
Yet >you< and >your< ilk want to bring EVERYONE back under the yoke of SLAVERY. Why is that, traitor-troll?
Teaman

Mount Holly, NJ

#107281 May 10, 2013
GoGoBar wrote:
<quoted text>
If temporary tax cuts arent "stuff" what is.
It set the precedent, became permanent.
The rest follows.
Do you mean the out of control spending follows?
GoGoBar

Chachoengsao, Thailand

#107282 May 10, 2013
Teaman wrote:
<quoted text>
Do you mean the out of control spending follows?
Correct. Consumer spending increases as credit is made available without any real growth in wages and productivity.
Bubbles form and Wall St. gobbles up the tax cuts.

The wealth is tranferred to the highl;y experienced investors who understand such matters.
For some reason they are not inclined to reinvest the money in the domestic economy. Perhaps because they have killed it.

The reulting poverty leaves starving millions.

“Shall NOT be infringed!”

Since: Apr 13

San Jose, CA.

#107283 May 10, 2013
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
Vikings: Spam spam spam spam...
PS: your hero was an avowed racist and opposed the liberation of slaves.
How about THIS guy?-

"Another charge is, that the President has violated the Constitution of the United States in this: that he has disarmed citizens; refused them the privilege, under the Constitution, of bearing arms. Sir, it is true that he has refused traitors the privilege of using arms against the Government of the country. General Lyon, of Missouri, and the gallant Frank Blair, and their associates, did disarm some fifteen hundred rebels at Camp Jackson, near St. Louis; and for that we are told they are violators of the Constitution. What other instance does the Senator from Kentucky remember in which the right to bear arms been refused to any citizen? The President has not only guarantied, by his action, the right to bear arms, but he has invited the patriotic citizens of the United States to bear arms for the only noble purpose for which men can take arms--in defense of the Constitution and liberties of people. Is the right to bear arms in Kentucky so sacred that it may never be violated? Then, why do you not bear arms in defense of the Constitution and liberties of the Republic? There is a right to bear arms that is worth something. Does Kentucky stand upon the right to arms? Why is she not bearing arms upon the battle-field to-day, beside Massachusetts and Indiana and Ohio, and the loyal States? Why does she not insist upon her right to bear arms, when traitors are seeking to tear down the Government under which we live?"

- Senator James H. Lane, of Indiana, July 16, 1861, The Congressional Globe, Pg. 143.(James Henry Lane also known as Jim Lane,(June 22, 1814 July 11, 1866), served as a United States Senator and as a general who fought for the Union).
wacosaki

Saint Paul, MN

#107284 May 10, 2013
I think i need a vulcan cannon and some nukes just for hunting purposes
Teaman

Mount Holly, NJ

#107285 May 10, 2013
GoGoBar wrote:
<quoted text>
Correct. Consumer spending increases as credit is made available without any real growth in wages and productivity.
Bubbles form and Wall St. gobbles up the tax cuts.
The wealth is tranferred to the highl;y experienced investors who understand such matters.
For some reason they are not inclined to reinvest the money in the domestic economy. Perhaps because they have killed it.
The reulting poverty leaves starving millions.
Those investors, or investment firms, are usually maintaining a worker's retirement fund.

Or, big corporations finance elections and buy the elected politicians once in office. The politicians, in turn, protect the corporations, keep them from failing, and subsidizes them with the money of over taxed citizens. They repeal the Glass Steagall Act and relax bank regulations. The politicians look forward to working for these corporations as consultants and lobbyists once out of office. The politicians provide "stuff" to the public while in office and tell them they care and will protect them. The public, in turn, for fear of losing their stuff, keep reelecting these bought and paid for politicians. They don't know any better because they've been dummied down in government schools and the media is partisan. A symbiotic relationship. How's that?
Teaman

Mount Holly, NJ

#107286 May 10, 2013
wacosaki wrote:
I think i need a vulcan cannon and some nukes just for hunting purposes
Or just purchase a small caliber rifle that just happens to look like a military one.

“Shall NOT be infringed!”

Since: Apr 13

San Jose, CA.

#107287 May 10, 2013
wacosaki wrote:
I think i need a vulcan cannon and some nukes just for hunting purposes
"Congress have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and EVERY OTHER TERRIBLE IMPLEMENT of the soldier, are the BIRTHRIGHT of an American .... The UNLIMITED power of the sword is NOT in the hands of EITHER the federal or state government, but, where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the HANDS OF THE PEOPLE."--Tench Coxe, Pennsylvania Gazette, February 1788.(Mr. Coxe was a leading proponent of the Constitution and Bill of Rights and an American political economist and a delegate for Pennsylvania to the Continental Congress in 1788-1789. He was appointed revenue commissioner by President George Washington on June 30, 1792).
Larry

Sydney, Australia

#107289 May 10, 2013
I don't want to see the US become Somalia. I don't have all the stats with me, but I think GoGo Bar has done a pretty good job of showing that the statistics are quite telling, Australia has not had a mass shooting event since the inplementation of gun control laws after the port Arthur, call it a statistical anomoally or whatever you like.
Larry

Sydney, Australia

#107290 May 10, 2013
*Implementation

It would be a fantastic move by The government to introduce some significant laws on gun regulation. If nothing changes you can't expect any change aye.
GoGoBar

Chachoengsao, Thailand

#107291 May 10, 2013
Larry wrote:
I don't want to see the US become Somalia. I don't have all the stats with me, but I think GoGo Bar has done a pretty good job of showing that the statistics are quite telling, Australia has not had a mass shooting event since the inplementation of gun control laws after the port Arthur, call it a statistical anomoally or whatever you like.
OOh dont say that. The gunnuts want to reclass a double shooting massacre at a University as a shooting massacre.
Wheras a mass shooting in the US has to be 4 deaths nor more. But if they want to reclassify a double murder shooting a mass murder then they may have to accept that the US has about 3 per day

It is strange how all the refugees want to get away from Somalia conditions but these gun guys want to bring it on as fast as possible.
Larry

Sydney, Australia

#107292 May 10, 2013
Not at Boolaroo, don't know why it comes up..

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#107293 May 10, 2013
Larry wrote:
*Implementation
It would be a fantastic move by The government to introduce some significant laws on gun regulation. If nothing changes you can't expect any change aye.
We already do have gun regulations in place it the BS the Federal Government is and has been involved with that no one knows about just look at what happened in Tucson and Phoenix where the US Federal Government purposely allowed licensed firearms dealers to sell weapons to illegal straw buyers so what is more Regulation going to do when the US Federal Government is involved in BS like this and putting the public safety at risk besides at the same time creating a gun crisis for political purpose.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ATF_gunwalking_s...

The Gun Show "Loophole:" More Gun Control Disguised as Crime Control

Federal law requires that any person "engaged in the business" of selling firearms possess a valid Federal Firearms License. This is true whether one is selling guns for a living at a gun store or at a gun show. Licensed dealers must conduct an NICS check prior to the transfer of any firearm - regardless of where that transfer occurs. The majority of sellers at gun shows are licensed dealers and do conduct checks.

http://www.ncpa.org/pub/ba349

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Guns Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Kahr CW40 PROBLEM (Dec '08) 8 hr OlFed 48
News Texas law professor calls for repeal of Second ... (Nov '13) Apr 15 AMERICA 12,178
Democrats: Get A $2,000 Tax Credit For Turning ... Apr 14 Get Out 10
News Local Jews upset by Holocaust references in cam... (Jun '12) Apr 13 swedenforever 112
News Who's calling the shots in Canada? Apr 10 Truth and Facts 2
Suspect in Arizona Shooting Spree a White Supre... Apr 5 Truth and Facts 82
Why I'm for the Brady Bill By Ronald Reagan Apr 5 Truth and Facts 36
More from around the web