Who was that you told me was going to take your guns away?

[rb336]

typical right-wing bullshit from an obvious NRA shill. they always forget that the first line of the second amendment contains the phrase "well regulated."

They also ignore the fact that being armed, even if you are trained, isn't going to be much help - witness the recent killing of a highly skilled gunman at a shooting range. If you put an armed guard at a school, the ONLY thing that will change is that the first person/people killed will be the guard[[s).

[oladub]

typical right-wing bullshit from an obvious NRA shill. they always forget that the first line of the second amendment contains the phrase "well regulated."

They also ignore the fact that being armed, even if you are trained, isn't going to be much help - witness the recent killing of a highly skilled gunman at a shooting range. If you put an armed guard at a school, the ONLY thing that will change is that the first person/people killed will be the guard[[s).

Granted, the Second Amendment could have been written more concisely so it is not so open to interpretation but without making a connection between the subjects of the first clause and the second clause or defining them, the final clause seems to apply to both clauses. If "the people" is synonymous with "militia", a couple of other amendments mentioning "the people" would have to be similarly re-interpreted.

The NRA suggestion of putting guards in schools is also very expensive. A better idea would be to stop infringing upon the rights of schools to offer gun training to staff members and allow them, if certified, to pack. Not so brave and lonely nerds are less likely to start shooting if they weren't assured that they could get attention in a no gun zone. Breivek could have kept kept shooting until he ran out of targets or ammo while he waited for police to arrive from the next county. Had he worried that a person or two on that island might have had weapons, the whole massacre might have been less likely or, at least, he would have had to make more car bombs. Norway has lots of gun laws. They protected Breivik not the students. Utah does allow school staff to be trained in weapon use and carry in schools.

Gun Free Zones - 1/2 Hour News Hour

[old guy]

Try to imagine the government or any other entity approaching the public and saying, hand over all your firearms. Then get realistic. Then possibly move on to another topic. It would never happen.

[Crumbled_pavement]

Try to imagine the government or any other entity approaching the public and saying, hand over all your firearms. Then get realistic. Then possibly move on to another topic. It would never happen.

I respect people that have a healthy skepticism of our government, as we all should. No one should blindly follow any institution that hasn't earned their trust first. However, I do get amused by the paranoid crowd. They say that there are already 9K gun laws on the books and the feds don't enforce them, yet they are positive the feds would enforce a law to confiscate all their guns. They bellow that government is completely incompetent, yet government would be able to easily round up the people and send them to concentration camps, except for those brave gun owners that terrify said government. Government is dumb, wasteful, inefficient, incapable and incompetent in their minds, except when it comes to doing something they don't want the government to do. Then they fear, government suddenly transforms into a well honed, well oiled machine that operates with great precision. It just tickles me.....

[Honky Tonk]

Granted, the Second Amendment could have been written more concisely

This has always been a point of interest with me. WHAT IF the writers of the Constitution could have been whisked forward into the future. If they could have had the foresight to see modern day civilization as it is, and the problems it has. Would they have still written the Second Amenment as it is?

[oladub]

This has always been a point of interest with me. WHAT IF the writers of the Constitution could have been whisked forward into the future. If they could have had the foresight to see modern day civilization as it is, and the problems it has. Would they have still written the Second Amenment as it is?

That's a good question. We can only speculate about its answer. My guess is that the founders would be upset about the wide scale abrogation of the Constitution by modern neocon Republicans and Democrats. Hamilton might be somewhat pleased to see the expanding powers of the executive branch but otherwise I would use Ron Paul as a proxy for the founders wishes regarding the Second Amendment and other issues. Were King George also whisked into the future, it's difficult to imagine that he wouldn't approve of President Obama's gun control legislation, expanded use of executive orders, and other extra-Constitutional measures.

[Honky Tonk]

That's a good question. We can only speculate about its answer. My guess is that the founders would be upset about the wide scale abrogation of the Constitution by modern neocon Republicans and Democrats. Hamilton might be somewhat pleased to see the expanding powers of the executive branch but otherwise I would use Ron Paul as a proxy for the founders wishes regarding the Second Amendment and other issues. Were King George also whisked into the future, it's difficult to imagine that he wouldn't approve of President Obama's gun control legislation, expanded use of executive orders, and other extra-Constitutional measures.

Yeah, I suppose. Depending what side of the fence you sit on. But I'm questioning whether or not they would give carte blanche on unlimited gun ownership. Those were different times with different needs. Like laws on the books mandating someone keep their hog tied up on Sunday. [[non-motorcycle).

[rb336]

Ron Paul as a proxy for the founders? what a crock. except, perhaps, for their feelings about race

[rb336]

NRA endorsement a negative:
39% less likely to vote for an NRA endorsed candidate
26% more likely
32% would not be affected one way or the other

It's 41% - 27% among independents.

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/m...-negative.html

[oladub]

Yeah, I suppose. Depending what side of the fence you sit on. But I'm questioning whether or not they would give carte blanche on unlimited gun ownership. Those were different times with different needs. Like laws on the books mandating someone keep their hog tied up on Sunday. [[non-motorcycle).

I suspect they would still be concerned with a rogue government gradually eliminating our rights or the bill of rights. If they came back and found out that Bush and Obama supported the Patriot Act, certain provisions in the NDAA, expanded intrusions on our privacy, airport gropings, Waco, ongoing wars waged without congressional declarations of wars, the New London vs. Kelo ruling, the executive ordering the assassination of Americans without court approval, the fed printing money, and so on, I don't know where they would start. My guess is that they would not make it any easier for the statists of the day to disarm the population under the circumstances.

Just today I read about how an agency of the Federal Reserve which is in turn owned by mega-banks, is trying to get the "authority" to 'manage' our 401k savings. Our federal government and its puppet masters seem to be getting ever more blatant about extending controls over us. The founders would probably be shocked.

rb: Ron Paul as a proxy for the founders? what a crock. except, perhaps, for their feelings about race

rb, Blacks lost a higher percentage of their income, a higher percentage of their savings, and and a higher percentage of jobs under Obama than whites. It follows that for anyone aware of that in 2012, voting for Obama was either racist, sadistic, or masochistic. Ron Paul wanted to get rid of the war on drugs which he always noted put a far higher percentage of blacks in jail for the same offenses.

How about going down a list of liberties, support of the Bill of Rights, messy foreign entanglements, consistency of federal government programs and policies with the Constitution, or some things I mentioned above and comparing Ron Paul's positions with Obama's? Better not; the founders might mistake you for a Tory supporter of King George the Third or his Barry the First proxy.

[Whitehouse]

He's gonna need to grow that belly a little if he wants to stay in this sport.



Story

Photoshop...

And second thing. That's not an assault rifle, which is the only weapon that needs to be taken away from people with no business having one.

[Papasito]

Umm, can I temporarily let down my gaurd if they are my party? ----

Nope. Never.
And both parties are corrupt and are not putting the people first.
They see us as a sea of schools of fish they wish to control, not as a nation of individuals.

And here's something to think about: When one party grants the Government all this extra control, when the other party wins, they have all these new powers courtesy of the opposing party to use as THEY see fit. AKA: Backfire.

[Papasito]

OMG Have you seen all the Obama gun photoshops flying around? Bwaaahahaha So Funny

[Papasito]

But WAIT!! There's MORE!!

[noise]

That's funny?

[Zacha341]

This one is the most compelling...
[/ATTACH]

Hah, the usual Photoshop golly-wow... recall applied to Bush, Bush II, Clinton etc. What pixel manipulation could have been had during Nixons run!?

[Papasito]

The debt limit one is funny.
Sure, Reagan overpsent, the Bushies added to it, and Obama doubled it.
It's a shame Obama chose his course to further the debt, because if he REALLY wanted to be the President who created change and altered the course of this country, we would be PAYING OFF THE DEBT and not adding to it .. If that corner was turned under his administration, it would have been one for the history books.

Unfortunately it still needs to happen because the point of no return may have passed. If any of our leaders truly care about the future of this country, they need to turn it around in a grand way, and not just float the sinking ship along.

We're getting 8 more years of a ship taking on water.

[Detroitrobert]

Seeing a politician who takes a photo opportunity to show himself shooting a rifle, while telling you and me we should not be shooting [[or owning) a rifle, is not compelling enough for me to feel my 2nd amendment rights are safe and sound.

Could you point me in the direction of where President Obama said that we, "...should not be shooting [[or owning) a rifle..."?

Thanks.

[Zacha341]

Well stated.

IMO relative to 'some' supporting or defending the run-away spending and from the POTUS's agenda accordingly, there's too much general world view thinking that 'they did it too' [[referring to spend-golly of the repubs) and 'Now it's our turn' [[in revenge of what was done) to do that!

...if he REALLY wanted to be the President who created change and altered the course of this country, we would be PAYING OFF THE DEBT and not adding to it...

[oladub]

Could you point me in the direction of where President Obama said that we, "...should not be shooting [[or owning) a rifle..."?

Thanks.

No one has accused President Obama of being politically stupid or naive enough to say "that we...should not be shooting [[or owning) a rifle..." However, if his lies, threats, characterizations of opponents, abuses of power, and actions as an Illinois State Senator were compiled for circumstantial consideration, one would have to be a Pollyanna in manic phase [[or a Democrat) to trust his intentions; sort of like believing he has any intent of controlling spending.

An experience based perspective perspective from Canada. Maybe Obama can be trusted more than the Canadian government, eh?

[Detroitrobert]

No one has accused President Obama of being politically stupid or naive enough to say "that we...should not be shooting [[or owning) a rifle..."

Yes, Papasito said that very thing. That's a direct quote from him, said in response to the photo of the president shooting a shotgun.

[oladub]

Yes, Papasito said that very thing. That's a direct quote from him, said in response to the photo of the president shooting a shotgun.

First, I didn't originally post that as your post # 46 incorrectly claims. You posted that in post #43 so don't try to blame your comment on me. Second, I was responding to your comment which was not a direct quote of Papasito as you claimed in post #46. It wasn't a direct quote. it was your characterization.

[Papasito]

Firstly there should be a GUNS megathread.

Secondly, here's a glimpse at Obama's record on Gun Control:
http://www.ontheissues.org/domestic/...un_control.htm

Thirdly, I've been hearing stories on the radio and TV about buyback programs for TOY guns and of chuches, ect. offering "no questions asked" "turn-in stations" for firearms.

Every time we hear about a shooter, it's a disturbed person. People around them say "I saw the warning signs" but no one does something.

Government thinks the solution is to ban certain types of guns and to make clips smaller. Does that really solve issues with a society of distorted values and a numbness to violence? I don't think so.

We have a value problem in America, a mental health problem in America. Guns are not something new to our society. Our greatest generations grew up playing Cowboys and Indians, Cops and Robbers. Shooting cap guns and Red Rider BB guns. Taking rifle class IN SCHOOL. Understanding the value of humanity. Understanding how to use a gun, how to hold a gun, the dangers of a gun, and how to be safe with a gun.

The proposals of Government [[and anti-2nd amendment special interest groups) to just "remove" guns [[or any other thing that are deemed to be an issue in society) is a quick jab straight to our rights and not a real solution.

Guns are banned completely in Mexico. There are Cartel wars there, guns and gun deaths are rampant nationwide.
In America, alcohol was banned. Prohibition. But you could still find alcohol if you wanted it.
If they completely banned guns today, you could still get them if you wanted them and had the money to buy them. Laws do not matter to the lawless.

Guns were an everyday part of America's greatest generations.
The answer is morals, values and education.

[Detroitrobert]

Guns are banned completely in Mexico.

I don't know who told you that, but that is completely and utterly false.

[rb336]

Firstly there should be a GUNS megathread.

Secondly, here's a glimpse at Obama's record on Gun Control:
http://www.ontheissues.org/domestic/...un_control.htm

Papa, it doesn't take long to show that that article has a bit of a credibility issue. It makes it appear that it is quoting factcheck.org, but here is what factcheck.org ACTUALLY said:

NRA Claim: "Ban the Manufacture, Sale and Possession of Handguns"
False