Loading Loading
JLhiggins 7 months agoAre gun bans constitutional? Rather depends on who s answering the question. 
countryplowboy 7 months ago
Response to JLhiggins
Are gun bans constitutional? Rather depends on who s answering the question. Unfortunate fools w … Show full post Anyone who believes they are must not understand "The right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."
JLhiggins 7 months ago
Response to countryplowboy
Anyone who believes they are must not understand "The right to keep and bear arms shall not be … Show full post We'll have the right only until the nuts and dastards in Washington find a way to convince enough fools that guns are dangerous. Arms will be licensed, controlled, banned and confiscated until only criminals and terrorists have them. And by terrorist I don't mean the same people the nuts and dastards in Washington are on a rampage against.
countryplowboy 7 months ago
Response to JLhiggins
We'll have the right only until the nuts and dastards in Washington find a way to convince enough fo … Show full post Guns are dangerous. It is a proven fact that owning firearms is a direct danger to would be tyrants.
JLhiggins 7 months ago
Response to countryplowboy
Guns are dangerous. It is a proven fact that owning firearms is a direct danger to would be tyrants. Horseradish, and you know it.
countryplowboy 7 months ago
Response to JLhiggins
Horseradish, and you know it. I was saying the only reason for a politician to get rid of the 2nd Amendment is that they want to be General Secretary for Life. Guns don't kill people, People kill people. A gun is just the normal tool of choice. 
tidus2004 (Republican) - 7 months agoThese bans are not Constitutional.If you start with The "scary" ones the average dolt will agree.Then later it will be easier to ban all the other ones. 
Zachary King (Independent) - 7 months agoCertain restrictions I do believe are necessary, nobody wants a neighbor packing a bazooka in their house. I believe citizens should be limited to handguns and hunting weapons in their home.
countryplowboy 7 months ago
Response to Zachary King
Certain restrictions I do believe are necessary, nobody wants a neighbor packing a bazooka in their … Show full post I don't and never have advocated letting everyone and their brother pack around Anti-Tank weaponry. However you cannot say you can have one type of gun but not another. I think Automatic weapons should be harder to get than others, however you can't just tell everyone they can't have them. The second amendment won't allow it.
Zachary King (Independent) - 7 months ago
Response to countryplowboy
I don't and never have advocated letting everyone and their brother pack around Anti-Tank weaponry. … Show full post You re right about obtaining automatic weapons. But gang members DO have access to it. As much as I agree the Second Amendment is great, it is very flawed. I live in a city where guns are involved with most of the murders in our city. The other day, a gang member opened fire during a funeral procession of a rival gang member with an 9mm pistol. There's just so much injustice in the world it's not even funny.
countryplowboy 7 months ago
Response to Zachary King
You re right about obtaining automatic weapons. But gang members DO have access to it. As much as I … Show full post How?
Zachary King (Independent) - 7 months ago
Response to countryplowboy
How? Which statement are you referring to? This reply system is really outdated.
countryplowboy 7 months ago
Response to Zachary King
Which statement are you referring to? This reply system is really outdated. How is the second amendment flawed?
JLhiggins 7 months ago
Response to countryplowboy
I was saying the only reason for a politician to get rid of the 2nd Amendment is that they want to b … Show full post Chicken. Can't stick with what you already said, "Guns are dangerous. It is a proven fact that owning firearms is a direct danger to would be tyrants" and make sense of it? You are not a good devil's advocate.
countryplowboy 7 months ago
Response to JLhiggins
Chicken. Can't stick with what you already said, "Guns are dangerous. It is a proven fact that … Show full post Well I wasn't being a DA on this one. I was trying to make a joke. And I pity anyone who is a Devils Advocate on Gun Bans, because the stance has so little to work with in facts.
JLhiggins 7 months ago
Response to countryplowboy
Well I wasn't being a DA on this one. I was trying to make a joke. And I pity anyone who is a Devils … Show full post You're not a good comedian either.
countryplowboy 7 months ago
Response to JLhiggins
You're not a good comedian either. Not trying to be, I just crack a joke every now and again. 
Terry T (Libertarian) - 6 months agoI do not think that gun bans are constitutional. The second amendment clearly gives the American people the right to bear arms and as it says that right shall not be infringed!
countryplowboy 6 months ago
Response to Terry T
I do not think that gun bans are constitutional. The second amendment clearly gives the American peo … Show full post Yes it does, I often wonder if our congressmen actually read the Constitution. And I come to the conclusion most of them do not. 
hepsy 6 months ago
Response to Terry T
I do not think that gun bans are constitutional. The second amendment clearly gives the American peo … Show full post You're right! The purpose of government is to protect our rights, not to reduce them. 
ironhead (Libertarian) - 6 months agoThey are all unconstitutional. What part of "shall not be infringed" do people not understand? 
amnestymyazz 6 months agoI guess it's just human nature to try and twist things to make them fit your needs. The Constitution is clear in it's meaning. Gun control advocates will try to tell you the founding fathers never foresaw AK-47's with 60 round clips or smart ammo that explodes instead of penetrates you. I think if there was one piece of technological advancement they foresaw, it was firearms. They set up the government. They knew how the USA was going to defend itself. They anticipated lots of money being available for advancement. They wanted the populace armed to protect it from tyranny. Most coups occur when the aggressor takes over the military. Take over the military, take over the country. Our right to bear arms gives us a fighting chance. THAT is what they envisioned. That's why they wrote what they wrote how they wrote it. They meant what they said. Leave it alone.
amnestymyazz 6 months ago
Response to Zachary King
You re right about obtaining automatic weapons. But gang members DO have access to it. As much as I … Show full post If that gang member threw a bomb in there made from household cleaners and fertilizer would you advocate stricter controls on Tide Laundry Soap and sheep S**t? |
countryplowboy Member Since: Mar 17th, 2009 - Debate started 7 months ago
The Assault Weapons ban, the San Fran and D.C handgun bans. Cali's ban on .50 caliber rifles. Does anyone think these are constitutional?
Sorry
Login or Register to add your comment.
It will take only a few seconds, we promise!