The Right of the People to Own Weapons Cant be Expunged From The Debate.

Not to mention the philosophy political, foundational to the rights of the people, which is the whole of the argument. Against tyranny it is made and the right established by political history. Part and whole of "forming a more perfect union" philosophy from Bunker Hill to the Gettysburg Address.

And yet it is very clear that those operating under another of the amendments have been politically and philosophical subverted to be useful to the philosophy of tyrants. This is understandable considering that if the first amendment subverted had been the peoples right to defend its rights by arms, the people would have become alarmed and the design of tyrants exposed.

For so long now the battle has been against that particular right, the 2nd, well established and historically justified, even today and if not by our fathers then by an abundance of reason and historical demonstration that the 2nd was a valid holding within the right listed by any reasonable mind.

The press lending itself as servant against the other rights, and as an organ of the state, should be disregarded by the people in as editor of the constitution.

a reply to: Logarock

Don't worry. The press cannot amend the Constitution.

a reply to: Phage

No, but the 'press' and ignorance of a frightened people go a long way in strengthening 'their' resolve.

Praying President Trump is strong and will not allow any remarkable or unremarkable issue to come from this... False flag.

peace

a reply to: silo13

Don't worry, the NRA is a powerful lobby. Deep in the swamp.

a reply to: Phage

"Press"? Or "Reichsministerium für Volksaufklärung und Propaganda"?

Our government uses the media as their Whip on the people.

I've very recently discovered and concluded there is absolutely no middle ground in the gun debate in this country, it's either one extreme or the other. One way or the other, all or nothing, no compromise. Everything is a slippery slope leading to a total gun grab.

Like so many issues in government in this country, you have to be on one side or the other, otherwise you're irrelevant and insignificant noise no one will hear.

a reply to: Phage

Couldn't tell them that.

a reply to: ausername

The people have the 2nd amendment. No slippery slope there on that side. Cant say the same for the other.

a reply to: Logarock

Hear Hear!

We mustn't allow all of American's rights to be reformed based on the actions of one individual.

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: Logarock

Hear Hear!

We mustn't allow all of American's rights to be reformed based on the actions of one individual.

Well if we did we would have to shut down most of the "press".

originally posted by: ausername
I've very recently discovered and concluded there is absolutely no middle ground in the gun debate in this country, it's either one extreme or the other. One way or the other, all or nothing, no compromise. Everything is a slippery slope leading to a total gun grab.

Like so many issues in government in this country, you have to be on one side or the other, otherwise you're irrelevant and insignificant noise no one will hear.

a reply to: DBCowboy

Why is there a question of compromise anyway. Don't see the benefactors of the 1st amendment being forced into a reconsideration of their constitutional position.

originally posted by: Logarock

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: Logarock

Hear Hear!

We mustn't allow all of American's rights to be reformed based on the actions of one individual.

Well if we did we would have to shut down most of the "press".

Stop the Presses? Thats a good start. First step taking back our country, secure all the media outlets.

originally posted by: silo13
a reply to: Phage

No, but the 'press' and ignorance of a frightened people go a long way in strengthening 'their' resolve.

Praying President Trump is strong and will not allow any remarkable or unremarkable issue to come from this... False flag.

peace

Yet everytime there is a story in the media about immigrants taking over Europe, you believe the media and come on here with that same ignorance you are denouncing in this thread.

originally posted by: Logarock
a reply to: DBCowboy

Why is there a question of compromise anyway. Don't see the benefactors of the 1st amendment being forced into a reconsideration of their constitutional position.

They'll have to get rid of the 1st, 4th, and 5th Amendments if they really want the 2nd gone.

But even people on this site don't have a problem with that.


Basically, these anti-freedom assholes are going to make a criminal out of me simply because I want to have something for home defense.

originally posted by: intrptr

originally posted by: Logarock

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: Logarock

Hear Hear!

We mustn't allow all of American's rights to be reformed based on the actions of one individual.

Well if we did we would have to shut down most of the "press".

Stop the Presses? Thats a good start. First step taking back our country, secure all the media outlets.

Cant do that. But do recognize their nature, intent, contradictions ect

In Texas here we have hunting licenses for tyrants or any sign of tyranny....what

your state doesn't have these yet.....well get some!!

we used to.....now this a true story.....we used to keep our tyrannt tackle in our back truck windows.....along with our wedding tackle whilst driving the back roads

ntrptr:

We mustn't allow all of American's rights to be reformed based on the actions of one individual.

One individual is bad enough, but multiple individuals committing 40 individual gun rampages killing 350 Americans over the last 30 years or so, now that ought to be making people sit up and ask questions as to why enough is not be done to insure it doesn't happen again.

If the gun is not the problem, and that people are the problem, ban all people from having guns. It really is as simple as that. Either ban the gun, or ban the people, and throw the 2nd amendment out as a crackpot idea, which is about as useful today as a chocolate fire guard.

a reply to: Logarock

Why is there a question of compromise anyway. Don't see the benefactors of the 1st amendment being forced into a reconsideration of their constitutional position.

As if you, me or anybody has an actual right to go on broadcast news and 'speak freely' .

Or open carry a slung rifle 'freely'. That right has long been Infringed (compromised) away.

Ask twenty thousand people at that venue if they would like to have had 'some guns' while they were all cowering and huddling.

The threat isn't from guns, or the lone nut , its the law makers that have reduced us to cowering huddled victims, hiding from one guy.

a reply to: GBP/JPY

Our state is headed by a guy that voted for the first simi auto ban way back.