"Conservative" Columnist: Repeal Second Amendment

Yes, he's like a couple of forum posters here who insist upon labeling themselves Republicans or Conservatives but very nearly always tout and support the most pernicious of leftwing doctrine and just as obviously cling to the most hurtful and hateful aspects of that increasingly radicalized ideology. Conclusion, he can call himself what he wants but he is no conservative and if he is a registered Republican then he is one in name only; or in other words we call him . . . RINO.

 

Yes but that is because the leftists ruling the people did not remove all of their arms. That's probably in future drafts of plans, the final removal of arms for most citizens; probably just below the elbows.

 

No state or city has got stricter leftist style gun laws than Chicago, Illinois and yet it's murder city there. Leftist style restrictions on rights have not stopped anything that our leftists claim to be their end goals.

 

It is in your groins where your citizens lack the capacity to enjoy liberty and say no to authoritarians

 

Indeed as a nation to date we lack the stomach or drive to effectively neuter ourselves as a population via the way in which Australians allowed themselves to be metaphorically neutered and turned into a nation of serfs. But we will bear your advise in mind in case any of our patriots desire to turn into leftists. Although after eight years of witnessing Barack Obama ram this nation's head into the ground the people in general finally seem to have had their fill of the Left so far as "Hope and Change!" are concerned.

 

You don't need to know

 

Demonstrate such.

Cite such. It has followed the precedent set by Heller in two separate cases so far.

Irrelevant.

 

So ultimately the problem being referred to by yourself, is an individual deciding that they are not going to follow and abide by the rules of society, and instead do what they want to do.

 

Rucker 61, no one is going to have to do anything except regulate weapons of mass murder. Gun Bunny philosophy always falls apart.

Xenamenes cannot support that Gorsuch is not under the influence of senior justices, and Xenamenes clearly does not understand Heller. Kennedy will be the decider. The sane, moral American individual decides he will follow and abide by the rules of society, and refrain from what they would otherwise do.

J.Idallian does not get that we don't care about his sick fascination with weapons of mass murder. We don't care why they think the way they do. The legal approach to the problem is going to change to protect all Americans.

 

Mass murder is committed with motor vehicles quite often.

Which has yet to be proven.

Then either demonstrate precisely what is not understood, or simply refrain from speaking any further.

Demonsrtate such.

Which possesses what relevance with the discussion?

If it did not come to pass after Sandy Hook, or any other mass killing, it will not come to pass now.

 

"Regulate", lacking details, is a word without meaning, as is the term "weapons of mass murder". The latter consists of every type of firearm in the hands of citizens, knives, hammers, gasoline and other common items.

 

As long as no guns are used, it matters not how many people are killed.

Most of those complaining now, would not make a single "peep" if a man murdered 20 men with an aluminum baseball bat.

 

What law do you want to change? Do you want to abolish the 2A?

 

Xenamenes gives his opinions, and I thank him.

SCOTUS will decide.

 

If it happened twenty times a year, I bet they would.

 

And what action would be taken? Ban baseball bats?

 

You would never hear of it.

Anymore than a call to ban genetalia because of Rape.

 

the only safety gun bans promote is that of violent criminals. its why the people who excuse criminals are usually the same who want to ban guns

 

The Court has held that “the Second Amendment extends, prima facie, to all instruments that constitute bearable arms, even those that were not in existence at the time of the founding,”
https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/15pdf/14-10078_aplc.pdf

I'm not too worried about it.
You?

 

More unsupportable nonsense.

 

Then why not ban violent Rap music that calls for the killing of Police, White People, or calls women hos, etc.... Music that glorifies hate and hate crimes ?

Because you can't.

 

Also see US v Cruickshank Con RECOGNIZES it does not GRANT rights.

 

Not liable for the torts and crimes of others. Its also a good thing our government isn't utilitarian.

 

Then go on and pass your amendment sparky! I'm sure you'll have no trouble with the votes lol

 

There are no so called "Lax Gun Laws" in the
U.S., all States have a minimum standard for a purchaser of any firearm.

All firearms purchasers;
Must fill out all relevant paperwork, a form 4473, and establish and fulfill the residency requirement of that State (for Handguns) and pass an instant background check, and if by chance a Felon did slip through, he or she would still be a prohibited person in illegal possesion of a firearm, another crime.

Why the Anti Gun clack insists there are States with Lax Gun laws is beyond me.

Even when Felons get guns by other means, it is illegal and they get caught and can be prosecuted for those offenses.