2nd amendment goes nationwide!!!

[Searay215]

another gun-totin' liberal here

Since we are on the subject....here is a little survey. Do you carry? If yes answer.
A. All the time
B. Most of the time
C. Some of the time
D. Occasionally
E. Never

I am a B

[Detroitnerd]

Since we are on the subject....here is a little survey. Do you carry? If yes answer.
A. All the time
B. Most of the time
C. Some of the time
D. Occasionally
E. Never

I am a B

I'm an E. I don't own any firearms. Just one more damn thing to clean ...

[GOAT]

Great victory for freedom!!!



http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_suprem...pphu-container

Says the people with the guns.

[Detroit Stylin]

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.

Now do you think the founding fathers meant that becuase at the time this was signed there was no standing Army?

Or becuase Colt, Smith and Wesson, and other special interests put it into the heads of the simple minded that way back then the FF's saw crime in pandemic proportions in our times and decided that this meant for self defense......?

[lincoln8740]

Sorry, Lincoln. I'm pro-gun. See what a fool you are?

and its easy to say very hard to prove


rb336: "another gun-totin' liberal here"

congratulations you are a very small minority

[ggores]

Shooting somebody, with a gun, is just downright rude. Yet, guns are a constitutional right, it seems. But what really cracks me up, is that, sometimes I read NRA literature, just for something to do, and, oy, talk about so much whining and belly-aching! So I dunno, all's I had time to read was that gun rights were "extended", and of course, everyone gonna get all piped up about it. Naturally. Lethality is really a huge tickle point for Americans. Astonishing. But belying the letter of the law, it's just really something else to just see, day in.... day out, how general societie's sense of decorum and politeness has really just gone the way of the reuben. Food for thought, ya know?

[Gannon]

Part of the problem with the discussion of the Second Amendment is often -- dare I say it? -- the very people who are pro-gun. There is an uneducated, macho, chest-thumping, strident, nativist streak running through that set that turns off a lot of people. It's a classic case of some people being their own worst enemies.

Nah, there are plenty of reasonable gun owning and toting people...who are wise enough to keep quiet around folk who assume that anyone who dares to bear arms is an uneducated, macho, chest-thumping, strident, nativist streaker. It is not worth the effort necessary to surprise, educate, and paradigm-shift their detractors. Too much a shock when you shake someone from their world-view.


This is a good decision from the Supreme Court, biggest deal is they clarified who was covered by this amendment, mere Militia members or everyone. It is clear they said everyone has the right to keep and bear arms via the Constitution...

[Ray1936]

For what it's worth, when I retired from the DPD after 25 + years of carrying a gun, I didn't even apply for a CCW permit. Moved out of state anyway, and have no desire or need to carry. Still have my snub nose in the bedroom nightstand, of course, but that's the extent of it.

And I'm most grateful that the only use I put my weapons to while on the job were to dispatch a couple of mangled dogs on the freeway through the years.

But that's me. Many of my colleagues hope to be buried with their pieces, I think.

[gibran]

I probably view ray's perspective as an authority... I tend to support the Polices perspective about right to bare arms...not the right to bare bazookas... i am a liberal and I would love to shot skeet....thus owning a regulated firearm would be alright with me...I seriously doubt the right to have cop killer bullets with semiautomatic firearms...what the constitutional framers had in mind.

[gibran]

we all have the right to bare arms....

Attachment 6574

[Sstashmoo]

F. Rarely

If someone lives in an area or is engaged in an activity where they feel the need to pack a firearm for protection, they need to move and/or change their activity.

Carrying a firearm carries a huge responsibility, living by the sword, dying by the sword and all that.

[Detroitej72]

and its easy to say very hard to prove


rb336: "another gun-totin' liberal here"

congratulations you are a very small minority

Yet you prove you have no argument about a so-called minority by choosing to ignore my point:

Detroitej72Quote:
Originally Posted by lincoln8740
Detroitnerd and the other leftists lost a big one today and they are still smug with their elitists noses in the air.[quote]

This sentence proves you are a tool of the right wing nuts, as you lump anyone who fails to embrace your narrow views as UN-American, anti-patriot and a "leftist".

I happen to be pro-gun ownership, pro-life and a Christian, yet I see that the conservative activist judges on the Scotus committed a major fumble today.

You and the fringe right can continue to play your fiddle for another day.

I understand why you are afraid though, you are scared of liberals why may or may not have guns!

[firstandten]

Obama's record on the Second Amendment speaks for itself.

How does his record on the second amendment speaks for itself ??

Please enlighten me.

[Islandman]

For what it's worth, when I retired from the DPD after 25 + years of carrying a gun, I didn't even apply for a CCW permit. Moved out of state anyway, and have no desire or need to carry. Still have my snub nose in the bedroom nightstand, of course, but that's the extent of it.

And I'm most grateful that the only use I put my weapons to while on the job were to dispatch a couple of mangled dogs on the freeway through the years.

But that's me. Many of my colleagues hope to be buried with their pieces, I think.

Great post Ray. The way it should be.

[Papasito]

I am all about tougher screening for people to purchase guns. But I don't believe in taking them away. Armed citizens is probably the primary reason the USSR never had the backbone to invade the USA during the Cold War, and is probably the only reason enemies around the world don't team up to topple our shaky, bankrupt nation today. We are the only country on the planet that can round up tens [[or hundreds) if thousands of armed civilians in a matter of hours. Any military leader worth their weight in salt would think long and hard before invading a country that can do that.

[Sstashmoo]

Quote: "I am all about tougher screening for people to purchase guns."

I'm not. I think people should be free to walk in and purchase any time they want. I'm for enforcing the law and dealing with those that walk our streets and are not qualified to purchase a firearm.

[lincoln8740]

I happen to be pro-gun ownership, pro-life and a Christian,

you throw homosexual at the end there and you could win an award for being the smallest voting bloc ever!!!

[MCP-001]

How does his record on the second amendment speaks for itself ??

Please enlighten me.

Again, the information is included in the post.

I'm not going to hand-hold anyone through a debate on about the Second Amendment.

[ghettopalmetto]

I am all about tougher screening for people to purchase guns. But I don't believe in taking them away. Armed citizens is probably the primary reason the USSR never had the backbone to invade the USA during the Cold War, and is probably the only reason enemies around the world don't team up to topple our shaky, bankrupt nation today. We are the only country on the planet that can round up tens [[or hundreds) if thousands of armed civilians in a matter of hours. Any military leader worth their weight in salt would think long and hard before invading a country that can do that.

1. Anyone who uses the word "probably" is just guessing.

2. Armed rednecks are no substitute for a trained military.

I have no position against guns, per se. I just don't think we need "rights" to shoot everyone, whenever and wherever we want, just because we're too damned insecure and chickenshit in our own skin. How many more Columbines and Virginia Techs do we need to have in the name of "freedom"?

If you need to carry a gun everywhere to not be afraid, just fucking lock yourself in a concrete bunker already.

[sturge]

Quote: "I am all about tougher screening for people to purchase guns."

I'm not. I think people should be free to walk in and purchase any time they want. I'm for enforcing the law and dealing with those that walk our streets and are not qualified to purchase a firearm.

You don't want tougher screening yet you want to deal with those not qualified to purchase? Wouldn't tougher screening prevent those not qualified to purchase from getting them?

[Stosh]

Quote: "I am all about tougher screening for people to purchase guns."

I'm not. I think people should be free to walk in and purchase any time they want. I'm for enforcing the law and dealing with those that walk our streets and are not qualified to purchase a firearm.

Boy, now I've read everything. I know a couple of psychopaths that would love to have a handgun, perhaps I can get some in their hands and send them over to your house so YOU can deal with them?

[firstandten]

Again, the information is included in the post.

I'm not going to hand-hold anyone through a debate on about the Second Amendment.

My bad, I missed the link, I think out of all you provided this is the important point


Q: You said recently, “I have no intention of taking away folks’ guns.” But you support the D.C. handgun ban, and you’ve said that it’s constitutional. How do you reconcile those two positions?
A: Because I think we have two conflicting traditions in this country. I think it’s important for us to recognize that we’ve got a tradition of handgun ownership and gun ownership generally. And a lot of law-abiding citizens use it for hunting, for sportsmanship, and for protecting their families. We also have a violence on the streets that is the result of illegal handgun usage. And so I think there is nothing wrong with a community saying we are going to take those illegal handguns off the streets. And cracking down on the various loopholes that exist in terms of background checks for children, the mentally ill. We can have reasonable, thoughtful gun control measure that I think respect the Second Amendment and people’s traditions."

It should be up to the local communities to decide on the extent of gun control. Again he is not saying to get rid of the second amendment. I don't see that as him wanting to take away your guns . As an Illinois legislator there is a reality that illegal guns in Chicago are out of control. So you go back to that to prove a point that he is against the second amendment and wants to take away your guns. As a candidate for president or since he's been president what has he said to lead you to believe that he wants to take away your guns.

Living in Detroit, if I have criminals with more firepower than the police the second amendment is just some abstract statement to me. The reality is that I want those guns off the street and the thugs put in jail.

[Sstashmoo]

Anyone with high propensity for violence should not be on the streets.

[Sstashmoo]

Quote: "I know a couple of psychopaths that would love to have a handgun, perhaps I can get some in their hands and send them over to your house so YOU can deal with them?"

Is this some sort of threat? It could easily be taken that way Stosh.

[Stosh]

Quote: "I know a couple of psychopaths that would love to have a handgun, perhaps I can get some in their hands and send them over to your house so YOU can deal with them?"

Is this some sort of threat? It could easily be taken that way Stosh.

You are just fucking amazing. First you want ANYONE to get a hand gun, and tells people to "deal with it", then I make it personal, and now you are threatened? Maybe you should rethink your positions? It's all well and good if it's abstract, but when it's a personal matter SStashmoo goes ballistic. Or should I say whiny? Learn to tell the difference between real and hypothetical situations. Maybe I should issue a disclaimer in all my statements from now on:

Note to SSTashmoo... NOT a real situation.

Anyone with high propensity for violence should not be on the streets.

Riiiiight. And who's the judge of that?

And it's truly amazing that your mooness would even think that I would give psychopaths guns.
That costs money which I don't have. If I'm not packing, why should they?
What a maroon you are. But better yet, I should expect no less, considering the inanity you post on a regular basis.