One Political Plaza - Home of politics
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register ☰
Main
Try to think rationally
Page <prev 2 of 17 next> last>>
Jun 22, 2019 06:27:08   #
Rose42
 
Common_Sense_Matters wrote:
The "sawed-off shotgun" mention is just a mention of a gun, not a gun that would be included in an assault weapon ban.

I see AK-47 mentioned there by the author of the article.

You know, we hear plenty of talk about how "the left is gonna take our guns, ALL our guns", but that whole "the sky is falling" paranoid bull crap has yet to materialize. There has NOT been any attempt to take ALL guns nor have they gone out rounding them up either. Gun buy backs happen some times but no real effort to round them all up via knocking down doors and taking them. How many times will you people go all "chicken little" on this issue?




Edit: Additionally, there was mention of 9mm ammo as well but not the gun to fire it, the 9mm ammo and the gun would also be safe from the assault weapon ban as well.
The "sawed-off shotgun" mention is just ... (show quote)


Its foolish to think they wouldn’t dk it if they could whip up enough support from the public. And they’re getting there inch by inch. There are even some nuts on OPP that think semi autos should be banned

They did it after Katrina in New Orleans.

Reply
Jun 22, 2019 07:38:39   #
Smedley_buzkill
 
Common_Sense_Matters wrote:
It wasn't ALL guns he was talking about, only high powered assault weapons.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2018/05/03/ban-assault-weapons-buy-them-back-prosecute-offenders-column/570590002/

This was the op-ed piece he wrote for USA Today.


There is no such thing as a "high powered assault weapon." His definition of assault weapon includes almost every semi auto firearm ever made. tens of millions of them owned by law abiding citizens who have not used them for any criminal purpose.
The military, rather than the Liberal Democrat definition of assault rifle is a shoulder fired weapon firing an intermediate powered cartridge and having selective fire capability. Those are already regulated to hell and gone.
Common Sense Matters? Apparently not to you.

Reply
Jun 22, 2019 08:13:29   #
TommyRadd Loc: Midwest USA
 
Common_Sense_Matters wrote:
The "sawed-off shotgun" mention is just a mention of a gun, not a gun that would be included in an assault weapon ban.

I see AK-47 mentioned there by the author of the article.

You know, we hear plenty of talk about how "the left is gonna take our guns, ALL our guns", but that whole "the sky is falling" paranoid bull crap has yet to materialize. There has NOT been any attempt to take ALL guns nor have they gone out rounding them up either. Gun buy backs happen some times but no real effort to round them all up via knocking down doors and taking them. How many times will you people go all "chicken little" on this issue?




Edit: Additionally, there was mention of 9mm ammo as well but not the gun to fire it, the 9mm ammo and the gun would also be safe from the assault weapon ban as well.
The "sawed-off shotgun" mention is just ... (show quote)


For someone who claims “common sense matters”, you sure don’t have much.

The second amendment reads:

“A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.”

What part of the word “right” in this context don’t you understand?

What part of “shall not be infringed” don’t you understand?

Apparently, you are one of those people who prefers security over liberty. And that is why you justify tyrannical politicians to infringe on your rights and the rights of others.

Here’s a little true common sense for you:

“They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” – Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania, 1759

“To disarm the people…is the most effectual way to enslave them.” – George Mason, referencing advice given to the British Parliament by Pennsylvania governor Sir William Keith, The Debates in the Several State Conventions on the Adooption of the Federal Constitution, June 14, 1788

“Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.” – William Pitt (the Younger), Speech in the House of Commons, November 18, 1783

Go here for more:
https://thefederalistpapers.org/us/the-founding-fathers-explain-the-second-amendment-this-says-it-all

As a Christian, I emphatically live by Christ’s commandment to love my enemies; as an American, I fully support American liberties, and therefore must decry infringements upon our liberties for what they are: encroachments to be disdained as tyranny.

The right to keep and bear arms is enshrined in the Constitution as a right against tyrannical government. If the government wields fully automatic weapons, and the populace is only allowed relatively pea-shooters, then the populace has been effectively disarmed. If you want to know who the real tyrants are, merely look at the ones wanting their “subordinates” to be incapable of defending themselves against them. Our Constitution gives authority to “the people”, not “the aristocracy”.

If you had any common sense, whatsoever, you would understand that any justification for the infringement of any liberty is a defense of tyranny, or, worse, you don’t have any true understanding of those concepts whatsoever.

Reply
 
 
Jun 22, 2019 08:38:40   #
Seth
 
TommyRadd wrote:
For someone who claims “common sense matters”, you sure don’t have much.

The second amendment reads:

“A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.”

What part of the word “right” in this context don’t you understand?

What part of “shall not be infringed” don’t you understand?

Apparently, you are one of those people who prefers security over liberty. And that is why you justify tyrannical politicians to infringe on your rights and the rights of others.

Here’s a little true common sense for you:

“They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” – Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania, 1759

“To disarm the people…is the most effectual way to enslave them.” – George Mason, referencing advice given to the British Parliament by Pennsylvania governor Sir William Keith, The Debates in the Several State Conventions on the Adooption of the Federal Constitution, June 14, 1788

“Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.” – William Pitt (the Younger), Speech in the House of Commons, November 18, 1783

Go here for more:
https://thefederalistpapers.org/us/the-founding-fathers-explain-the-second-amendment-this-says-it-all

As a Christian, I emphatically live by Christ’s commandment to love my enemies; as an American, I fully support American liberties, and therefore must decry infringements upon our liberties for what they are: encroachments to be disdained as tyranny.

The right to keep and bear arms is enshrined in the Constitution as a right against tyrannical government. If the government wields fully automatic weapons, and the populace is only allowed relatively pea-shooters, then the populace has been effectively disarmed. If you want to know who the real tyrants are, merely look at the ones wanting their “subordinates” to be incapable of defending themselves against them. Our Constitution gives authority to “the people”, not “the aristocracy”.

If you had any common sense, whatsoever, you would understand that any justification for the infringement of any liberty is a defense of tyranny, or, worse, you don’t have any true understanding of those concepts whatsoever.
For someone who claims “common sense matters”, you... (show quote)


Very Well Put!

Reply
Jun 22, 2019 08:44:25   #
archie bunker Loc: Texas
 
lpnmajor wrote:
We've been hearing for years that certain elements want to end firearm ownership, even claiming that some of them will confiscate everyone's guns. Let's look at that rationally for a moment.

There are over 300,000,000 people in this country, there are 10's, perhaps 100's, of billions of potential hiding spots. Law enforcement cannot find illegal firearms, or prevent those who cannot legally posses firearms from...................possessing firearms illegally.

With that in mind, what rational thinker would believe that any level or branch of government, could actually confiscate ANYONE's guns? Law enforcement would have to search every home, shed, barn, office, boat, aircraft, storage unit, cabin, lodge, and every other structure where firearms could be hidden. In addition, they'd have to deploy ground penetrating radar, examining every inch of ground in the country. To even come close to this, there would need to be one searcher for every gun owner, placing every suspected gun owner under 24/7 surveillance, to prevent them from moving their weapons around.

Should the Federal government, by some stretch of the imagination, pass a law barring citizens from possessing firearms......... many States would refuse to enforce it and most law enforcement officers and military personnel would look the other way.

The long and short of it is; any suggestion that guns are going to be taken away from anyone, by anyone, is laughable in the extreme. Those who suggest such a thing are trying to use "the fear factor", to gain attention, money, power, or more likely..................all three.

Try to think rationally, don't fall for the ridiculous conspiracies.
We've been hearing for years that certain elements... (show quote)


Anyone with half a brain knows it can't be done. These politicos toss it out there to get votes. Just like the reperations BS. It's all about getting votes.

Reply
Jun 22, 2019 09:23:58   #
debeda
 
lpnmajor wrote:
We've been hearing for years that certain elements want to end firearm ownership, even claiming that some of them will confiscate everyone's guns. Let's look at that rationally for a moment.

There are over 300,000,000 people in this country, there are 10's, perhaps 100's, of billions of potential hiding spots. Law enforcement cannot find illegal firearms, or prevent those who cannot legally posses firearms from...................possessing firearms illegally.

With that in mind, what rational thinker would believe that any level or branch of government, could actually confiscate ANYONE's guns? Law enforcement would have to search every home, shed, barn, office, boat, aircraft, storage unit, cabin, lodge, and every other structure where firearms could be hidden. In addition, they'd have to deploy ground penetrating radar, examining every inch of ground in the country. To even come close to this, there would need to be one searcher for every gun owner, placing every suspected gun owner under 24/7 surveillance, to prevent them from moving their weapons around.

Should the Federal government, by some stretch of the imagination, pass a law barring citizens from possessing firearms......... many States would refuse to enforce it and most law enforcement officers and military personnel would look the other way.

The long and short of it is; any suggestion that guns are going to be taken away from anyone, by anyone, is laughable in the extreme. Those who suggest such a thing are trying to use "the fear factor", to gain attention, money, power, or more likely..................all three.

Try to think rationally, don't fall for the ridiculous conspiracies.
We've been hearing for years that certain elements... (show quote)


There are many law abiding citizens in this country. THEY are the ones who would mostly give up their guns, were it the law of the land. And that is the danger.

Reply
Jun 22, 2019 10:01:17   #
son of witless
 
lpnmajor wrote:
We've been hearing for years that certain elements want to end firearm ownership, even claiming that some of them will confiscate everyone's guns. Let's look at that rationally for a moment.

There are over 300,000,000 people in this country, there are 10's, perhaps 100's, of billions of potential hiding spots. Law enforcement cannot find illegal firearms, or prevent those who cannot legally posses firearms from...................possessing firearms illegally.

With that in mind, what rational thinker would believe that any level or branch of government, could actually confiscate ANYONE's guns? Law enforcement would have to search every home, shed, barn, office, boat, aircraft, storage unit, cabin, lodge, and every other structure where firearms could be hidden. In addition, they'd have to deploy ground penetrating radar, examining every inch of ground in the country. To even come close to this, there would need to be one searcher for every gun owner, placing every suspected gun owner under 24/7 surveillance, to prevent them from moving their weapons around.

Should the Federal government, by some stretch of the imagination, pass a law barring citizens from possessing firearms......... many States would refuse to enforce it and most law enforcement officers and military personnel would look the other way.

The long and short of it is; any suggestion that guns are going to be taken away from anyone, by anyone, is laughable in the extreme. Those who suggest such a thing are trying to use "the fear factor", to gain attention, money, power, or more likely..................all three.

Try to think rationally, don't fall for the ridiculous conspiracies.
We've been hearing for years that certain elements... (show quote)


Rationally, you are wrong. In DC and Chicago the citizenry have been effectively disarmed. If the people running those cities ever get national power, guns are gone.

Rationally you are wrong.

Reply
 
 
Jun 22, 2019 10:10:46   #
Hug
 
It seems like the states that are leading the way toward communism are in a hurry to confiscate guns, but some states are trying to maintain their liberty and have constitutional carry laws, which means that any citizen in good standing can carry anywhere, open or concealed, without any kind of permit. When the guns are confiscated your liberty is confiscated. Folks who want guns confiscated are either socialist/communist, or they are ignorant of history.

Reply
Jun 22, 2019 10:10:54   #
JFlorio Loc: Seminole Florida
 
Time for Sanctuary cities for gun owners.
Seth wrote:
It happened, I lived there for many years pre-Katrina and, like me, many of my friends there are gun owners and it happened to a couple of them (not all, because like me some had concealed carry permits with legal reasons to carry and they weren't bothered). They knew others who'd also gotten the "knock on the door."

If it could happen on a local scale like that, it could happen on a large scale between cooperating jurisdictions. On the bright side, the only cooperation would likely be found in "progressive" run states and cities, whereas in redder states where the Bill of Rights still means something they'd be S.O.L.
It happened, I lived there for many years pre-Katr... (show quote)

Reply
Jun 22, 2019 10:11:12   #
Hug
 
It seems like the states that are leading the way toward communism are in a hurry to confiscate guns, but some states are trying to maintain their liberty and have constitutional carry laws, which means that any citizen in good standing can carry anywhere, open or concealed, without any kind of permit. When the guns are confiscated your liberty is confiscated. Folks who want guns confiscated are either socialist/communist, or they are ignorant of history.

Reply
Jun 22, 2019 10:12:22   #
Hug
 
JFlorio wrote:
Time for Sanctuary cities for gun owners.


There are states with constitutional carry laws.

Reply
 
 
Jun 22, 2019 10:12:58   #
JFlorio Loc: Seminole Florida
 
archie bunker wrote:
Anyone with half a brain knows it can't be done. These politicos toss it out there to get votes. Just like the reperations BS. It's all about getting votes.


Arch I believe certain states would try. Let’s see, you have a truck. I can make an AR. Hmmm. Might be lucrative if you catch my drift.

Reply
Jun 22, 2019 10:13:06   #
TommyRadd Loc: Midwest USA
 
Hug wrote:
It seems like the states that are leading the way toward communism are in a hurry to confiscate guns, but some states are trying to maintain their liberty and have constitutional carry laws, which means that any citizen in good standing can carry anywhere, open or concealed, without any kind of permit. When the guns are confiscated your liberty is confiscated. Folks who want guns confiscated are either socialist/communist, or they are ignorant of history.


Worth repeating!

Reply
Jun 22, 2019 10:13:28   #
JFlorio Loc: Seminole Florida
 
Hug wrote:
There are states with constitutional carry laws.


Really? Guess that’s why I carry.

Reply
Jun 22, 2019 12:50:03   #
PaulPisces Loc: San Francisco
 
Seth wrote:
In many States today, you can't make a purchase at s gun shop, not even a rifle or shotgun, without showing ID and having the sale recorded.

During Katrina, the NOPD went door-to-door of recorded firearms purchasers and confiscated their firearms -- some are even today having to go through attorneys to try to get them back.

Therefore, the only "safe" way to own a firearm in many States is to own them illegally.

In that way, unless you are in law enforcement or specifically have a permit to carry, you have to be a "criminal" to own a firearm that isn't vulnerable to potential confiscation.
In many States today, you can't make a purchase at... (show quote)


Your comments make no sense, Seth.

Reply
Page <prev 2 of 17 next> last>>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main
Home | Latest Digest | Back to Top | All Sections
Contact us | Privacy policy | Terms of use | DMCA
OnePoliticalPlaza.com - Forum
Copyright 2012-2024 IDF International Technologies, Inc.