Moving the red-herring offered here to its own topic: http://www.politicalforum.com/index...tims-with-gun-reforms.582569/#post-1072301253 Offered there is the premise that Republicans "do the same thing" as Democrats with respect to the violation of the 2nd and that someone - the pro-gun side, I suppose - thinks it is "OK" for them to do so. Is this true? And if so, are these Republicans excused -- that is,. is it OK - for doing so? I suggest that a comprehensive examination of modern-era state and federal laws - say, from the National Firearms Act of 1934 to present day - will show that in terms of legislation passed by D or R controlled legislatures and signed into law by D or R executives, the --overwhelming-- majority of state and local gun control laws that might violate the 2nd were passed and signed by Democrats and not Republicans. This negates the premise of the argument that Republicans "do the same thing" as Democrats and therefore negates any need to discuss if it is "OK" for them do so.
There is only one party that wants only the cops to have all the superior firepower; and that is the Democrats. All their gun control proposals exclude the police they protest for shooting people. I will never trust a Democrat on the issue of guns. I will never register a single gun, as they have proven once they have that information they will use it later down the road to disarm you.
There was a lot of 'infringement' done under the Regan administration, seemingly in response to the growing armed *legal* demonstrations by blacks in recent (relative to then) years (just one of many examples of gun control having a very real racist foundation), and is one of the reasons many of us look back fondly on Regans rhetoric more than his achievements (of which some were certainly great, and others just as greatly terrible). If only Regan had actually understood many of the things he was quoted saying... There are also plenty of 'Republicans' (RINOs) even today that support the notion that the 2A somehow only applies to hunting and thus we need an assault weapons ban. This is one of the reasons they are so often called RINOs (hint- its not a term of endearment). So, yes, we know 'Republicans' are often anti-gun authoritarian tyrants too. Not sure who thinks we don't... I'm guessing the 'usual suspects' that for some insane reason can't seem to pull themselves out of the less complicated political world of the 1980s... Tho, it is also easily demonstrated that the vast majority of the time, when a politician is pushing for gun control, its a D. The D's unanimously push for it, some R(INO)s quietly go along with it. Kennedy (my personal fav POTUS despite his many flaws) was the last D I can recall actually supporting the notion that our nation benefits from a well armed populace as the 2A intended. Since then, its basically been a unified D effort to disarm the nation with just enough R support to make very slow but very steady legal progress toward it. I emphasize legal because it will never become a reality that Americans are disarmed. The best they can hope for is to make all armed Americans into criminals. That is the 'best' case scenario the banners can hope for, and thus what I believe is their actual goal.
What's frightening is just how MANY politicians in both parties, along with TOO MANY of their supporters view the Bill of Rights and Constitution as nothing more than an impediment to achieving their goals.
