Gun Control and Second Amendment Rights

[jgalt]

off topic - deleted by jgalt...

[MNGunner]

The statement to which you refer doesn't say what you seem to think it does...

Let's try to put an end to this. Just answer this question:
Which party do you personally think is more supportive of the 2nd Amendment rights of Americans?

[farmerj]

The statement to which you refer doesn't say what you seem to think it does...

[jgalt]

off topic - deleted by jgalt...

[MNGunner]

The statement to which you refer doesn't say what you seem to think it does...

Let's try to put an end to this. Just answer this question:
Which party do you personally think is more supportive of the 2nd Amendment rights of Americans?

Prolly the Libertarian Party - maybe the Constitution Party. Beats me, I'm not familiar with every party's platform, though I'd bet the LP is at or near the top of the list...

I mean, of course, between the Republican and decocratic party...

[Heffay]

I mean, of course, between the Republican and decocratic party...

Why would you create a false duality? If you really care about 2nd amendment rights, you wouldn't vote republican.

[EdwardsTo]

I count 1404 words in Office 2007.

You also need to check your punctuation. F7 works for that. There are several comma's that are missing as well as other grammar issues.

But the content is great.

Word count doesn't contain the works cited.

[MNGunner]

Why would you create a false duality? If you really care about 2nd amendment rights, you wouldn't vote republican.

I didn't. Someone else claimed that Republican party is supposdly as bad as the dummycrats when it comes to our 2nd Amendment rights. I was simply replying to that claim.

If you really care about 2nd amendment rights, you wouldn't vote republican.

False, unfortunately. The reality is that it's still a two party system. A vote for the Presidential candidate of any party other than the Republicans was effectively the same as supporting obama in the last two elections.

[river_boater]

A vote for the Presidential candidate of any party other than the Republicans was effectively the same as supporting obama in the last two elections.

I'm curious: If Romney had won would you still make the same claim (supporting Romney)?

[MNGunner]

guys, can you take your pissin' match to another thread.

Please.

What does this have to do with the OP's original topic?

If there truly are people ignorant enough to think that the democratic party (again, nationally, not inside the minds of select individual voters or some select local candiates) is as supportive of 2nd Amendment rights as the Republican party, there there is a need to educate, wherever and whenever that opportunity arises.

[MNGunner]

Regarding the actual topic ( ) the Founders did not include "tests" for who is "fit to own guns" (mental health, etc.) that the author clams to be constitutional (without mentioning evidence, such as at least a supreme court interpretation) because they knew that such restrictions would be invaluable tools to an opressive tyrant or government.

The government could simply say "anyone know does not know which of the two main parties is more 2nd Amendment friendly is unfit to own guns" and that alone would render suprisingly many here gunless.

(This is not to be interpreted to mean that I believe that mentally unstable people should have access to firearms. I am only stating that the constitution does not say that.)

[MNGunner]

In my opinion, the paper has some good material, but needs some additional polishing because to me it does not yet come together as a coherent and polished work.
Also, aren't school papers still supposed to follow the formula 1) Hypothesis 2) supporting (or disproving evidence) 3) conclusion? At least that is what teachers used to demand?

[jgalt]

Regarding the actual topic ( ) the Founders did not include "tests" for who is "fit to own guns" (mental health, etc.) that the author clams to be constitutional (without mentioning evidence, such as at least a supreme court interpretation) because they knew that such restrictions would be invaluable tools to an opressive tyrant or government.

Are you denying there were restrictions on who could & could not "keep & bear arms" at the time the Constitution & BoR were authored? Remember that it wasn't until after the Civil War that any of the BoR restricted what the states could do - it only restricted what the Feds could do. The Feds could not infringe, but the Constitution did not prevent the individual states from doing so...

I'm more curious than anything, since whether or not you believe there were "tests" won't change the fact that there were...

[MNGunner]

Regarding the actual topic ( ) the Founders did not include "tests" for who is "fit to own guns" (mental health, etc.) that the author clams to be constitutional (without mentioning evidence, such as at least a supreme court interpretation) because they knew that such restrictions would be invaluable tools to an opressive tyrant or government.

Are you denying there were restrictions on who could & could not "keep & bear arms" at the time the Constitution & BoR were authored? Remember that it wasn't until after the Civil War that any of the BoR restricted what the states could do - it only restricted what the Feds could do. The Feds could not infringe, but the Constitution did not prevent the individual states from doing so...

I'm more curious than anything, since whether or not you believe there were "tests" won't change the fact that there were...

I didn't claim that there may not have been restrictions, the biggest at the time probably having been the practical restriction of money.
What I am claiming is that such restrictions were not mentioned in the constitution for a reason. This is what I believe. Some will believe that the words "well regulated" include such restrictions.

[XDM45]

It gets old.

Kind of like someone mentioning money in seemingly every other post? Yes, it does.

And like more and more people jumping in to attempt to challenge a well known fact? Yes. it does.

Ok. I've been putting off addressing the "money" comments/issue for awhile now, and I don't want to derail this thread....so here is my anwser. Agree with it. Disagree with it. Whatever you want. Call me an effen moron. All fine by me. I'm going to put this out there and then I'm done responding about it ever again.

When people whine over $100 for a PTC, yeah, I'm going to mention it. It was pretty much one person in another thread that had the issue. I don't think that most people here really that broke that they have a problem with $100 for a PTC, but then again that's just my opinion. If anything, it's just a case of wanting everything cheap or free. The MN PTC is pretty dang cheap when you break it down like I did in another forum, but some people refused to see that I guess.

When people complain over high prices and how they can't afford $50 for a box of .22LR ammo, which is high in this economy, but that's what the market wants right now, so pay it if you want it or don't pay it if you don't want it, that's all. It's not rocket science. It's the economy. It's supply and demand, so yeah, I'm going to mention money when it's part of the deal. People still complain over gas prices, but they still pay it. Why is ammo so different? Let's face it, guns for whatever reason you own them, aren't cheap. You really can't talk about guns without talking about money because it's an expensive tool|hobby|collection|etc one has.

You don't need a gun and ammo or a car, so both are choices. Plenty of people live without either one. I'm not saying that it's easy or convenient to get around without a car, but it can be done.I did it by my own choice for 10 years. I'm no better than anyone else. No one snuck up on me in the middle of the night and sprinkled me with holy fairy dust to made gold fly out my arse or made me more special than anyone else. There are people out there with a lot more and a lot less money than me. Big deal. That's life. Not every post I make is about money and I'm certainly not driven by it, although I'm sure people will disagree with that and they're entitled to their opinion; however money is just like any other tool which can be used in many ways; and the more of it you have, the more options you have, that's all. Money for money's sake is pointless. It's how you use it that matters, just like with any other tool.

I wasn't born with a silver spoon in my mouth, hell, I didn't even get a college degree, I only graduated high school, but I've worked my way up, gained some certifications, put in the time and effort to get where I am today. I've made some investments, some failed, some did poorly, and some have done pretty well, and so it is with many people. Rather than worry about if I mention money or not, perhaps some people would be better suited earning more of it for themselves instead of pointing fingers at me for mentioning it.

If I wanted to brag and be an ass, there's a lot of things I could say and do to do that, (as I'm sure some other people could do the same too.....), however, that's not what I'm about. I don't care. I'm certainly not going to try and impress anyone, as I couldn't care less if I did or din't impress anyone. It doesn't matter to me, but when people say how $100 is too expensive for a PTC, yeah, I'm going to mention money. We are gun owners. Guns are expensive. I fired off damn near $250-$300 of ammo yesterday, just like many of us do, and I find it hard to believe that people are going to complain over a $100. I doubt anyone on this forum is making close to minimum wage or is unemployed and sending lead downrange for extended periods of time. If someone here is, perhaps they need to invest that money in an education or something to make them more money so they can afford things like guns. Minimum wage living isn't easy. I did it as a teenage kid for my first job, and after that, never again did I work for so little, so I couldn't imagine paying bills on it as an adult.

Gun owners who complain about money are like Ferrari owners bitching about the price of gas. You have to look at them and think "WTF??!!"

Now I'm done,.