Are revolvers the most reviled of firearms available?

Hiding behind your false version of the second amendment to continue promoting gun sales practices that coincide with the highest rate of gun crimes in states and and countries is disillusioned. .

 

Is the number of firearm-related deaths in the united states currently higher or lower than they were twenty, thirty, or even forty years ago?

 

The above is nothing more than a statement of hyperbole, devoid of anything resembling fact, coupled with baseless accusations, all driven by what is ultimately nothing more than a seething, irrational, all-encompassing hatred, that is motivated by nothing more than simple intolerance for differing political ideologies.

Nothing that has been claimed on the part of yourself has ever been proven or substantiated. And nothing that has been stated on the part of yourself addresses the simple, basic fact, that there are no other countries similar to the united states. The united states is a wholly unique outlier, and cannot be compared to anywhere else.

 

Then explain what the true version of the second amendment actually is, so that everyone may finally know.

 

Talk about diversion, you are the one that indicated I made references to the Clintons and Yellow cake and now you call my challenge on your false post in that regard a diversion? Sure. Keep digging and contorting to try to disquise your obvious intellectial dishonesty exhibition.
BTW, I am not an American Republican, so you fail on that assumption as well.

 

Not when their definition of "making us safer" infringes upon our rights or undermines our Liberty.

Freedom itself has intrinsic dangers to it.

 

Hiding behind your warped idea that arming criminals somehow how makes the rest of us safer is a pretty poor reading of the constitution. Your rights aren’t automatically bestowed upon anyone, any time for any reason. Sad that you don’t recognize that. But it’s understandable. Many here are brainwashed into not being able to use a dictionary.

 

The second amendment is not absolute.

 

What is warped is your foolish claim that I in any way advocate for "arming criminals". That's nothing but a slanderous lie. I simply understand that criminals can get guns regardless of the law; we can certainly pass laws to penalize them for their criminal acts, but no law we pass will ever preemptively keep a criminal from getting what he wants. When the law infringes upon the rights of citizens who have committed no crime for the ostensible purpose of "combating crime", that law is wrong-headed and amoral... and so are those who support such assaults on liberty.

No, our rights are ours upon birth; they are intrinsic to a free people. The Founders clearly explained that. What is sad is that you don't recognize that.

 

Ha ha
Rediculous. No rights are absolute. You don’t get that do you ? Otherwise you’d allowing your 9 year old to carry a Glock to school.

 

That's a start. This time be exact and explicit.

 

?

 

It’s already explicit. Do you know what absolute means ? Look it up.

 

Yes. Tell us what you think the government is authorized to do with regards to gun control.

 

Tell me what “not absolute” means. You’ve yet to do that. You guys profess to be experts on the constitution and as yet, you can’t even define terms.

 

It means that some restrictions are allowed.

Which ones? Which ones are not?

 

Not our job. Pass the laws and let scotus decide.


Anything is possible

 

If you believe anything is possible, then you haven't read Miller, Heller, McDonald and Caetano, nor have you looked at the current makeup of the Supreme Court.

 

Unless you are a member of scotus you simply are a man with an opinion....one that does not count.


Pass the laws and let scotus decide. You do agree it is up to them.....don't you?

 

They've already said that the Second protects all bearable arms in common use, and that common use starts at "hundreds of thousands". If what SCOTUS decided wasn't important for future reference, they'd just say "yea/nay" for a decision and "next!" for the next case.

 

They have changed their minds on several occasions. You and I know they have been wrong in the past. They reverse themselves sometimes. All they need is the law before them to be able to do that. You are entitled to your opinion of what you think is constitutional but lets be clear that it carries no weight. Nor does mine.


Pas the laws and let scotus decide. It is their opinion that matters


Anything is possible

 

When is the last time they reviewed a gun control law and found in favor of the control?

 

How is this relevant? Are you saying that scotus never reverses itself?

 

On gun control? Not that I've seen.

 

But is it possible? No one says it will be easy. You just want gun control advocates to give up. I suppose blacks, women, gays...etc could have given up.

We do not do these things because they are easy.....we do them because they are hard.-----JFK