I, Publius: A cold, dead hand is stil...

I, Publius: A cold, dead hand is still dead

There are 74 comments on the Berkshire Eagle story from Apr 5, 2014, titled I, Publius: A cold, dead hand is still dead. In it, Berkshire Eagle reports that:

Some Americans really love their guns. In order to understand what is happening in this country, it is necessary to comprehend the salience of the gun issue to those who insist it is their right to keep and bear arms.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Berkshire Eagle.

First Prev
of 4
Next Last

Since: May 12

Chambersburg, PA

#77 Apr 15, 2014
talon7351 wrote:
<quoted text>
Last time I looked the 2nd AoA is shall not be infringed. So no Congress was Not granted the authority to do so. Further at the time period of the NFA, a 200 tax on a 5 dollar suppressor or a 200 dollar tax on a 25 to 60 dollar firearm is a prohibitive tax, no way around it, so the NFA was in direct violation of the 2nd AoA due to the intent.
So sorry, but just because the system has been abused for years does not mean that bastardizing the commerce clause is Constitutional. It show corruption. US v Lopez actually showed that there Is a limit to the commerce clause, but did congress listen, nope, they modified a few words then later changed a few more things and added it under a slightly different name to another bill.
But according to you this is proper and correct?
Most of the rest of your post is fluff, except government regulation is not serving the people, anymore it is nothing but ways to make paper criminals and force the governments will onto people at the point of a gun, so to speak.
Last I looked, our rights are not unlimited. Regulation of firearm ownership is Constitutional.

We are a nation of laws. Whenever Congress passes a law that violates the Constitution, it is overturned by the Supreme Court. That's the way it's always worked and the way it continues to work.

Currently we have an activist conservative majority on the Court which is acting on its political ideology rather than the law. So there have been some bad decisions which will eventually be overturned whenever we get a court that once again respects the Constitution and legal precedent. Until then we live under the law of the land and work to ensure that the rightwing extremist ideologues don't do too much damage.

But I do agree with part of your last paragraph - government regulation is not currently serving the people well. It has been and is being twisted to benefit the privileged few at the expense of the rest of us. It's sad you don't feel any outrage about that.

Banned

“This town is nuts...”

Since: Jul 09

Location hidden

#80 Apr 24, 2014
Dan the Man Chambersburg wrote:
<quoted text>Really? You think restrictions on types of firearms is the same as trying to eliminate the 2nd Amendment?

There have been efforts for decades to place restrictions on certain classes of weapons, but that is regulation, not an attempt to eliminate the Amendment.

And while government abuse happens, we are a nation of laws and we always reign things back in. That isn't an indication in any fashion that anybody is trying to eliminate any of our rights.

I'll take from your lack of further examples that you don't know of any actual attempts to eliminate our Constitutional rights.
It seems that your opinion of our 2A rights is very limited. Is your position that as long as we are allowed some form of firearm our 2A right is intact?

What if a law was passed that made it illegal to say anything negative about our state or fed government? Would our 1A right still be intact since we would still be allowed to say anything else we wanted?

The problem is that people like you only care about protecting the rights that you agree with or that you excersize.

Banned

“This town is nuts...”

Since: Jul 09

Location hidden

#81 Apr 24, 2014
Dan the Man Chambersburg wrote:
<quoted text>You believe you can defend yourself against Abrams tanks and Apache helicopters with the guns you have now?

If your concern is defending yourself from the United States government, then you'd need the same weaponry as the US military has. Do you believe the 2nd Amendment gives you a right to those weapons?
Yes, a armed militia can defend itself against tanks and any other weapons the government has it its disposal. The fact is that the first time any such weapons are used on American soil against Americans who are standing up for their Constitutional rights the government will have already lost that war.

The Federal government could never win a war against its own people because they wouldn't be able to identify their enemy. You can't kill what you can't see.

Banned

“This town is nuts...”

Since: Jul 09

Location hidden

#82 Apr 24, 2014
Dan the Man Chambersburg wrote:
<quoted text>These tyrants you refer to - how many came to power in democratic republics with a Constitution as strong as ours and a mature legal system that's been working for over 200 years?
Take a look at what Russia is doing right now.

Since: May 12

Chambersburg, PA

#85 Apr 25, 2014
Banned wrote:
<quoted text>
It seems that your opinion of our 2A rights is very limited. Is your position that as long as we are allowed some form of firearm our 2A right is intact?
What if a law was passed that made it illegal to say anything negative about our state or fed government? Would our 1A right still be intact since we would still be allowed to say anything else we wanted?
The problem is that people like you only care about protecting the rights that you agree with or that you excersize.
No, that is not my position.

The 1st Amendment is also not unlimited - there are already restrictions on it. I don't support your hypothetical but that doesn't mean the amendment is unlimited.

I care about protecting all of our rights. I have not said anything that would indicate otherwise.

Since: May 12

Chambersburg, PA

#86 Apr 25, 2014
Banned wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, a armed militia can defend itself against tanks and any other weapons the government has it its disposal. The fact is that the first time any such weapons are used on American soil against Americans who are standing up for their Constitutional rights the government will have already lost that war.
The Federal government could never win a war against its own people because they wouldn't be able to identify their enemy. You can't kill what you can't see.
You are, of course, over looking the obvious - the government has no interest in and has never had any interest in going to war against its own people. The only people talking about that sort of thing are extremist gunners who seem to have an interest in going to war with the US government.

Since: May 12

Chambersburg, PA

#87 Apr 25, 2014
Banned wrote:
<quoted text>
Take a look at what Russia is doing right now.
Oh? You consider Russia to be a democratic republic with a Constitution as strong as ours and a mature legal system that's been working for over 200 years?

There is simply no comparison between the United States of America and Russia. Just because a 2nd-rate regional power like Russia is behaving badly doesn't indicate anything whatsoever about our own government.
stupid

United States

#88 Apr 25, 2014
Dan the Man Chambersburg wrote:
<quoted text>You are, of course, over looking the obvious - the government has no interest in and has never had any interest in going to war against its own people. The only people talking about that sort of thing are extremist gunners who seem to have an interest in going to war with the US government.
I agree, the government does not want to go to war against Americans because they can't win that war. They would much prefer that we allow them to undermine our constitutional rights without so much as a word being said about it.

Since: May 12

Chambersburg, PA

#89 Apr 25, 2014
stupid wrote:
<quoted text>
I agree, the government does not want to go to war against Americans because they can't win that war. They would much prefer that we allow them to undermine our constitutional rights without so much as a word being said about it.
The only ones talking about a war between the US government and the American people are rightwing extremists. It's a paranoid fantasy without any grounding whatsoever in reality.

And our Constitutional rights are not being undermined. And when they were - through Bush-era torture, domestic spying, and unlawful detainment - PLENTY of words were said about it. People are STILL railing about it.

Because that's how our democracy works - whenever there is government over-reach, the American people and the courts respond to reign it in. That's how it's always worked. Talk about armed uprisings against the government ever becoming necessary are nothing more than extremist over-reactions to imagined violations.
stupid

United States

#90 Apr 25, 2014
Dan the Man Chambersburg wrote:
<quoted text>The only ones talking about a war between the US government and the American people are rightwing extremists. It's a paranoid fantasy without any grounding whatsoever in reality.

And our Constitutional rights are not being undermined. And when they were - through Bush-era torture, domestic spying, and unlawful detainment - PLENTY of words were said about it. People are STILL railing about it.

Because that's how our democracy works - whenever there is government over-reach, the American people and the courts respond to reign it in. That's how it's always worked. Talk about armed uprisings against the government ever becoming necessary are nothing more than extremist over-reactions to imagined violations.
Americans are not going to register their guns or hand them over to the government. There is no reason to divide the country this way. When government starts passing laws that are ignored by the people then government has over-stepped its bounds. That's what is happening in CT and NY right now.

Since: May 12

Chambersburg, PA

#91 Apr 25, 2014
stupid wrote:
<quoted text>
Americans are not going to register their guns or hand them over to the government. There is no reason to divide the country this way. When government starts passing laws that are ignored by the people then government has over-stepped its bounds. That's what is happening in CT and NY right now.
So you advocate lawlessness? We can all just ignore any laws we don't like?

Because the huge flaw in your argument is this - who gets to decide?

Can any group of people just decide to start ignoring US law, and then, by definition, the government has over-stepped its boundaries? You don't support that when it comes to immigration, do you? Where do you draw the line? Only laws YOU happen to disagree with can be ignored?

You're advocating for anarchy. The United States is a nation of laws. There are legitimate ways to oppose laws you don't like - either in the courts or at the ballot box.

The rightwing in this country is just pitching a hissy right now because you are losing at the ballot box and you don't like it, so you are advocating lawlessness. That's called being a sore loser.

Grow up.
Get Out

Jacksonville, NC

#95 Apr 27, 2014
Dan the Man Chambersburg wrote:
<quoted text>
So you advocate lawlessness? We can all just ignore any laws we don't like?
Because the huge flaw in your argument is this - who gets to decide?
Can any group of people just decide to start ignoring US law, and then, by definition, the government has over-stepped its boundaries? You don't support that when it comes to immigration, do you? Where do you draw the line? Only laws YOU happen to disagree with can be ignored?
You're advocating for anarchy. The United States is a nation of laws. There are legitimate ways to oppose laws you don't like - either in the courts or at the ballot box.
The rightwing in this country is just pitching a hissy right now because you are losing at the ballot box and you don't like it, so you are advocating lawlessness. That's called being a sore loser.
Grow up.
Sure, we’ll turn them in when the G Man says too.

According to ATF records, a total of 512,790 machine guns were registered across the country in 2014, more than 571,000 silencers, 2.2 million so-called destructive devices (which include grenades and other explosives), 137,201 short-barreled rifles and 131,951 short-barreled shotguns.
The automated ATF processing system was launched in 2013, but grew exponentially from 673 users last year to 10,000 today.

Since: May 12

Chambersburg, PA

#96 Apr 27, 2014
stupid wrote:
<quoted text>
I draw the line at any law that attempts to undermine the US Constitution. I'm fine with lawlessness when it comes to unconstitutional laws.
Oh, so anyone who decides that any particular law violates the constitution in their opinion, then they are free to ignore them?

The problem with your "standard" is that lots of folks (like yourself) already believe existing laws that have been cleared through the courts are unconstitutional anyway. Take a look at the so-called "sovereign citizens," "states rights separatists," and white supremacist groups.

You are advocating anarchy. You are advocating sedition. That is unconstitutional and un-American.

Since: May 12

Chambersburg, PA

#97 Apr 27, 2014
Get Out wrote:
<quoted text>
Sure, we’ll turn them in when the G Man says too.
According to ATF records, a total of 512,790 machine guns were registered across the country in 2014, more than 571,000 silencers, 2.2 million so-called destructive devices (which include grenades and other explosives), 137,201 short-barreled rifles and 131,951 short-barreled shotguns.
The automated ATF processing system was launched in 2013, but grew exponentially from 673 users last year to 10,000 today.
I think you responded to the wrong post. What you've posted is completely unrelated and unresponsive to what I posted.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 4
Next Last

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
News Clinton blames Republican leaders for a 'paraly... 2 hr Chicagoan by Birth 1,572
News Democrats to push for universal background chec... Fri payme 4
News Melania Trump will address immigration controve... Aug 23 JohnInLa 234
News George Soros, Other Democratic Megadonors Plowi... Aug 21 Heath Ledger Suic... 2
News New Dating Site Aims to Pair Concealed Carry Si... Aug 21 RobertM 1
News Psychiatrists Reminded To Refrain From Armchair... Aug 20 lorr d 4
News In Several States, Trump's Poll Monitors May Be... Aug 17 Marauder 9
More from around the web