Support for gun control down dramatically since 2012

  • Thread starter Thread starter RGCheek
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I do not carry a gun around because “they let me”, I carry gun because it is my right. No law will change that.
It should be no one’s right to open carry an AK-47 into a neighborhood restaurant or bar. It’s quite ridiculous. Gun Control does not mean taking away guns, it’s common sense in making background checks mandatory with no loopholes. Once you pass the check, buy all the guns you want.
 
It should be no one’s right to open carry an AK-47 into a neighborhood restaurant or bar. It’s quite ridiculous.
Who gave you the right to decide what is ridiculous?

God came down and appointed you Pope of Gun Control or what?
Gun Control does not mean taking away guns, …
Yes, it does. They cant confiscate your guns if they don’t have a list of owners and that is EXACTLY what happened in Louisiana during Katrina when the cops were sent to seize peoples guns. EVERY gun confiscation for the last 120 years was preceded by gun registration.
it’s common sense in making background checks mandatory with no loopholes. Once you pass the check, buy all the guns you want.
A one time background check? Well, seems we agree on something. 😃
 
Yes it is ridiculous, dangerous and quite foolish to be able to open carry Ak-47s/any automatic weapon into a restaurant/grocery store/library/etc…

And most of all common sense.
 
Yes it is ridiculous, dangerous and quite foolish to be able to open carry Ak-47s/any automatic weapon into a restaurant/grocery store/library/etc…

And most of all common sense.
You will be pleased to know then that one is not allowed to carry an AK-47 or any automatic weapon any place in the US .
 
Due process gives mothers the right to kill their unborn babies? Where is that in the 14th amendment?

It amazes me how some can see implied rights that are not written but cant see rights plainly written like gun rights.
So why has Mitt Romney, George Bush and all the Republican candidates for presidency made a big deal for taking out the 14th amendment of the Constitution and getting it overturned. They are doing it because of what it is, simply put, it is killing the babies.

The Constitution, the law of the land, and the courts are against you on this one. You can cut it any way you like, which you are by the way, but it the way you are arguing is contradictory, what you are basically doing is knit picking.
 
So why has Mitt Romney, George Bush and all the Republican candidates for presidency made a big deal for taking out the 14th amendment of the Constitution and getting it overturned. They are doing it because of what it is, simply put, it is killing the babies.

…
Not sure what you mean by this, could you elaborate? The 14th amendment was passed after the civil war-- mostly in reaction to the way the southern governments were treating the newly freed slaves. Particularly abhorrent to the congress debating passing the 14th amendment were the gun laws which the southern states had passed disarming blacks and making the vulnerable to abuse by both government and the KKK.

Anyway, the intention was to ensure the newly freed slaves enjoyed all the rights and privileges of being a US citizen. However, the amendment was almost immediately eviscerated by the Cruikshank and Slaughterhouse rulings. These rulings held that the Bill of Rights were only limitations on the federal government, not the state. Thus the doctrine of ‘incorporation’ of the amendments of the states evolved. This meant cases had to be brought before SCOTUS involving the rights in the amendments (1st, 3rd, 4th, 5th etc.) with the court ruling whether that right was in fact a limitation on state government and thus incorporated against the state governments as well as federal. The big deal about the McDonald case in Illinois- SCOTUS finally had a case questioning whether 2A was a limitation on state governments, and the court ruled it is.
 
They were carrying scary looking guns but they were neither AK-47s nor automatics
Well those guns that you saw on that link which is true, you cannot argue that it was made up, are not to be carried around in public. What these individuals above all was to intimadate, but they used the 2nd ammendment as a cover.
 
Not sure what you mean by this, could you elaborate? The 14th amendment was passed after the civil war-- mostly in reaction to the way the southern governments were treating the newly freed slaves. Particularly abhorrent to the congress debating passing the 14th amendment were the gun laws which the southern states had passed disarming blacks and making the vulnerable to abuse by both government and the KKK.

Anyway, the intention was to ensure the newly freed slaves enjoyed all the rights and privileges of being a US citizen. However, the amendment was almost immediately eviscerated by the Cruikshank and Slaughterhouse rulings. These rulings held that the Bill of Rights were only limitations on the federal government, not the state. Thus the doctrine of ‘incorporation’ of the amendments of the states evolved. This meant cases had to be brought before SCOTUS involving the rights in the amendments (1st, 3rd, 4th, 5th etc.) with the court ruling whether that right was in fact a limitation on state government and thus incorporated against the state governments as well as federal. The big deal about the McDonald case in Illinois- SCOTUS finally had a case questioning whether 2A was a limitation on state governments, and the court ruled it is.
This is wahat I found, and it all points to the 14th ammendment.
law.justia.com/constitution/us/amendment-14/31-abortion.html

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roe_v._Wade

But the thing is a woman can have an abortion if she like. We can cut it up any way we like, but the Supreme Court used the Constitution to accept abortion.
 
You will be pleased to know then that one is not allowed to carry an AK-47 or any automatic weapon any place in the US .
Sure you can if you paid the ATFE licenses and fees.

I know of people who own and occasionally shoot full auto AKs.
 
So why has ***Mitt Romney, George Bush and all the Republican candidates for presidency made a big deal for taking out the 14th amendment ***of the Constitution and getting it overturned.
Show me. Link or it doesn’t exist.
The Constitution, the law of the land, and the courts are against you on this one. You can cut it any way you like, which you are by the way, but it the way you are arguing is contradictory, what you are basically doing is knit picking.
I don’t knit anything. 😃

No, the SCOTUS decisions are all on the side of the 2nd Amendment being a personal right, just like free speech and the right to vote.
 
But the thing is a woman can have an abortion if she like. We can cut it up any way we like, but the Supreme Court used the Constitution to accept abortion.
No, it did not. The court made up new law from nothing, arguing that a woman’s medical decisions for her body and health were outside the parameters of state control which is utter nonsense as this principle would also throw out laws against prostitution, taking illegal drugs and any number of things.
 
Show me. Link or it doesn’t exist.

I don’t knit anything. 😃

No, the SCOTUS decisions are all on the side of the 2nd Amendment being a personal right, just like free speech and the right to vote.
So you are saying those 2 men never said it, or you want to forget it. That is knit picking, or as we say in Spanish, you only remember what you want to remember. These are two links to Mitt Romney 2012 campaign in regards to abortion and the Constitution.

“He added during a debate in January that he’d like to see Roe v. Wade overturned, referring to the 1973 Supreme Court ruling that made abortion legal”
abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/10/mitt-romney-clarifies-abortion-stance-re-affirms-desire-to-defund-planned-parenthood/

I support the reversal of Roe vs. Wade, because it is bad law and bad medicine."
politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2012/oct/19/politifacts-guide-mitt-romney-and-abortion/
 
So you are saying those 2 men never said it, or you want to forget it. That is knit picking, or as we say in Spanish, you only remember what you want to remember. These are two links to Mitt Romney 2012 campaign in regards to abortion and the Constitution.

“He added during a debate in January that he’d like to see Roe v. Wade overturned, referring to the 1973 Supreme Court ruling that made abortion legal”
abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/10/mitt-romney-clarifies-abortion-stance-re-affirms-desire-to-defund-planned-parenthood/

I support the reversal of Roe vs. Wade, because it is bad law and bad medicine."
politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2012/oct/19/politifacts-guide-mitt-romney-and-abortion/
Overturning Roe V Wade has nothing to do with overturning the 14th Amendment
 
Overturning Roe V Wade has nothing to do with overturning the 14th Amendment
But what I am saying is that abortion has been made legal due to pro lifers arguing the Constitution. It is the law of the land. I’m saying, the 2nd Amendment was put in due to the threat of the British that’s why guns were allowed. Not to be parading around with a gun.

I mean my position has been, fine keep a gun, keep it at home. An intruder comes in go after him. Have armed security at every US school, not just high schools.

Maybe it is not the 14th amendment but it is a US Law which has been argued which has been defended using the US Constitution. That is why Im saying if we say, Oh the US Constitution lets me have a gun, but yes, it also let have abortion, and gay marriages.
 
Fixed it for you. ‘High capacity magazines’ and ‘assault weapon’ are legal terms not technical terms related to the capability or design of the weapon.
As the long time owner of weapons/magazines that fall into that category, I am very well aware of the distinction. My point wasn’t important anyway…
 
So you are saying those 2 men never said it, or you want to forget it. That is knit picking, or as we say in Spanish, you only remember what you want to remember. These are two links to Mitt Romney 2012 campaign in regards to abortion and the Constitution.

“He added during a debate in January that he’d like to see Roe v. Wade overturned, referring to the 1973 Supreme Court ruling that made abortion legal”
abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/10/mitt-romney-clarifies-abortion-stance-re-affirms-desire-to-defund-planned-parenthood/

I support the reversal of Roe vs. Wade, because it is bad law and bad medicine."
politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2012/oct/19/politifacts-guide-mitt-romney-and-abortion/
One can find two people who will say almost anything in either party, but that does not mean it is either representative of that party as a whole or that the establishment leadership of the party will actually do anything.

The leadership of the GOP is pro-abortion but they use the pro-lifers to get votes meanwhile they do absolutely nothing to change anything at the national level. Only a few states have done anything.
 
As the long time owner of weapons/magazines that fall into that category, I am very well aware of the distinction. My point wasn’t important anyway…
Sorry, didn’t mean any offense-- it’s just that term ‘high capacity magazines’ is a pet peeve of mine.
 
Sorry, didn’t mean any offense-- it’s just that term ‘high capacity magazines’ is a pet peeve of mine.
Me too and I don’t like the phrase ‘assault weapon’ being misused to refer to single shot nonmilitary rifles that look military.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top