Dems stage sit-in on House floor to push for gun vote

a reply to: introvert

When their JOB includes the following oath:

I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic;

and they then use your *ahem* "freedom of speech" on the Senate floor to not only not defend the Constitution, but actually attack it, they have become the "domestic enemy" they swore to defend against and you're goddamned right they're traitors.

This is why America fought the Revolutionary war. The Tree of Liberty looks to be in sore need of fertilizing.

a reply to: luthier

It may be our turn someday to sit on the floor and force a debate. So it's best if we tolerate dissenting opinions Especially if the conversation is swayed by what I consider a bad arguement and reasoning. We may be doing sit ins to restore the constitution.

And they would call it being 'obstructionist'.

originally posted by: neo96

What have they done to try and strip our rights to free speech?

There are two things that should not exist in a REPUBLIC.

Gun Free Zone.

Free Speech Zone.

I agree 100% on this.

On the bright side, if they are just sitting there, then at least for that time, they cant damage our nation .

a reply to: burdman30ott6

Thats horsecrap.

There is an amendment process. Any article in the constitution can be changed and our forefathers created that.

If they want to protest something dumb that's perfectly fine. Hopefully the public will know better.

If they don't. We will have to be the ones doing it.

However I seriously doubt 2/3 of the states are going to vote in their favor.

Protest and debate should be encouraged not discouraged just because you disagree with it.

The categorical imparitive man.

a reply to: butcherguy

Probably but who cares as long as there is freedom to do it.

I personally trust my logic enough not to have to silence my opposition's voice.

a reply to: luthier

Yep, the Tree definitely needs fertilized...

Why do guns owners act like the 2nd amendment is set in stone? It has the word amendment, which means the fore fathers thought that at some point it and other amendments may need to be changed with the times.

a reply to: luthier

There is an amendment process. Any article in the constitution can be changed and our forefathers created that.

The horse crap is gun control that is violating about 11 amendments.

ALL of them are in play.

From the ones that deal with due process, to the one that clearly says SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED.

To the 14th that says NO PERSON shall be denied, life,liberty, or property without DUE PROCESS.

And good luck getting all '57' states to ratify.

They know they CAN'T.

Which is why they created stuff like Operation Choke point, and are now pushing 'no fly,no buy'.

originally posted by: shredderofsouls
Why do guns owners act like the 2nd amendment is set in stone? It has the word amendment, which means the fore fathers thought that at some point it and other amendments may need to be changed with the times.

Why do journalists act like the First Amendment is set in stone?

a reply to: burdman30ott6

Right. Is that because you understand the philosophy of the empericists it because other people disagree with you.

I have a ccl, regularly do three gun races and am a hunter.

I like my rights.

I am also not so bull headed I have to silence people I disagree with.

Oh and go ahead and start that revolution.

Word of advice. Study up on philosophy so you have something to fight for.

a reply to: introvert

Ridiculous. Plain and simple.

They don't give a ## about gun violence, if they did they would have done something about it when dems controlled everything. If dems really cared, they would be speaking out about the massive gun violence in Chicago, due to strict gun control laws; they don't.

All this is, is a political move to inspire their dim-witted voters. They aren't going to pass through any gun control legislation, if they did they lose one of their poker chips for nothing.

originally posted by: shredderofsouls
Why do guns owners act like the 2nd amendment is set in stone? It has the word amendment, which means the fore fathers thought that at some point it and other amendments may need to be changed with the times.

Please take an American history lesson. It's an amendment because following the initial ratification of the Constitution, the Founders recognized that the powers of government required limiting and amended the Constitution by adding the Bill of Rights. It had nothing to do with changing amendments with the times and everything to do with placing sorely needed and vital shackles on the government, itself. Shackles which frankly need to be rekeyed and slapped back on the asshats in DC who have outgrown their intended purpose and need brought right back to heel.

originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: burdman30ott6

Thats horsecrap.

There is an amendment process. Any article in the constitution can be changed and our forefathers created that.

If they want to protest something dumb that's perfectly fine. Hopefully the public will know better.

If they don't. We will have to be the ones doing it.

However I seriously doubt 2/3 of the states are going to vote in their favor.

Protest and debate should be encouraged not discouraged just because you disagree with it.

The categorical imparitive man.

They will use the Supreme Court soon to get around the constitution.

Amendments are so old school. Who needs 2/3rds when a 5-4 vote by appointees is so much easier.

a reply to: neo96

I don't agree with ANY gun legislation that isn't made from a majority 2/3rds vote. Most of which involves the actual amendment process.

People have the right to try and persuade other people so that's all i support.

Because I know the situation can easily be reversed and I the protester trying to persuade.

So did the forefathers

It is time to purge the House and arrest these people for treason if you ask me. A Hamilton-Burr solution should do the trick.

a reply to: burdman30ott6

It's not. Look I think it's far too late to implement but the words well regulated do mean something. Were the framers Fascists?

a reply to: Ahabstar

And no one holds Congress to it.

originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: burdman30ott6

Right. Is that because you understand the philosophy of the empericists it because other people disagree with you.

I have no clue what you are trying to say here and my confusion doesn't stem from not knowing what the words mean. Please rephrase.

a reply to: luthier

People have the right to try and persuade other people so that's all i support.

Not when it comes in direct conflict with that piece of paper.

That was created SPECIFICALLY to limit the STATES power.

Not ours.

a reply to: introvert

No, he just pointed out it was YOU who proved the meme. That doesn't mean he lives by "memes"

It just means you do because your words proved that meme, or maybe it was a coincidence that your words proved a meme? Either way, you must live by memes unwittingly, since your words made it happen.

I now understand why you are always confused about these things.