Democrats: Is gun control worth it?

If the Supreme Court ever decided again to reverse its decision, it would presumably also overturn Roe vs. Wade, because the justices invoked the fourth and first part of the fourteenth ammendment, claiming they were individual rights also.

 

According to the laws passed by Congress a mere 6 months after writing the 2nd Amendment into law the original purpose of the 2nd was to deputize a GROUP of people (a well regulated militia) to put down tax rebellions and other insurgent groups.

 

Laws and interpretations of laws change all the time. See Dred Scott for a well known example.

 

I'm fine with background checks. What I'm not fine with is banning weapons, taxing ammo (or banning it), and a whole host of other suggestions I've heard bandied about.

 

once again the statist viewpoint rears its ugly head. no words have ever given anyone any rights. no government has ever given anyone any rights. the constitution was never meant to give people rights, but to protect our inalienable rights and to rein in rampant government intrusion into the lives of the citizenry. the constitution was not meant to control people, but to control government. just because one's rights are denied by government or the ignorant mob does not mean they do not exist. backing down and simply saying that that's the way it is is not just cowardly, it denies our humanity and all the sacrifices of those who came before us.

 

"I'm fine with background checks."

Taxcutter says:
Just operating the mechanism of background checks can be distorted into a de facto ban. We could have incidents lasting for months where " ... the computer is down..." The Hussein Obama types could use EPA style distortion of "pass" parameters to make nearly everyone flunk a background check.

Sorry, Floss. You are just too trusting of government.

 

Sure they could. Get back to me when it happens.

 

"Get back to me when it happens."

Taxcutter says:
It'll be too late by then. Government has a natural "ratchet." Whatever they latch onto the never turn loose. Once government abuse of background checks start there'll be no ending them.

 

No is all political posturing and wasting tax payers money.

 

So you are saying that the fourth amendment only applies to groups of people and that individuals have no protection from search and seizure by the government?

Both the second and fourth amendments use the term "the people". If the second only applies to people as a group and does not apply to individuals, then the fourth must only apply to people as a group and does not apply to individuals.

The wikipedia quote was a foolish one. No one is contesting that any of the amendments in the bill of rights has anything to do with the actions of private persons. Not one protects people from individuals, all of the amendments are protections of the rights of people from the government. What is being argued is your claim that because of the use of the words "the people" in the second amendment, it can only protect the right of a group of people to bear arms, and doesn't protect any individual right to bear arms. If that is true, then the fourth amendment, which uses the same term, must only apply to groups and not to individuals.

 

I disagree with your baseless opinion. The hypocrisy of left-wing Democrats is on display each and every day. The same people who screamed about the Patriot Act while Bush was President didn't utter a word when Obama not only extended the Patriot Act each and every year while in office. They didn't say a word when Obama kept Gitmo open, or when he passed the NDAA. They didn't say a word when he got us involved in Libya without the approval of Congress. Face it, your side is littered with inconsistent hypocrites.

Science doesn't have a liberal bias. Science is science. The interpretation of it can change with political affiliation.

No doubt that you would simply respond, but I find it ironic that you would respond in such a way after quoting something related to complexity. Studies show that the longer someone stays in the public education system, the more likely they are to adopt a left-wing view. Some grow out of it once they gain real world experience outside academia, though some stay that way when they go into fields that are heavily dependent on Government funding — like many scientists, for example.

 

You're already in the dark if you think the Constitution GRANTS any rights....

 

Colorado bans all magazines regardless of capacity.

So I ask again, Democrats: is gun control worth it?

 

bans all magazines??

 

Ummm... yep.

 

tubulars, rotaries, fixed bottom plate?

 

Find magazines with a fixed bottom plate and get back to me.

 

http://www.chuckhawks.com/hunting_rifle_magazines.htm

 

Those are not detachable. Try again.

 

you didn't specify detachable. you try again

 

The bill's focus is on detachable magazines.

I am not going to explain to obvious to someone who is too ignorant to keep up.

 

lol! that has nothing to with the fact that I asked you if Colorado was going to ban ALL magazines and you said yes. and you were wrong. damn youre easy.

 

Are you going to make any legitimate points, or continue to fall behind?

 

lol! its even more fun when you cant admit you slipped up! i'm two for two

 

Why educate yourself on the subject first? No one cares about fixed magazines. The issue is detachable magazines. The bill bans all detachable magazines that are on the market today. The Democrats are going to loose the six swing districts in Colorado.

Instead of discussing the issue, you choose to act like a small child and obsess over a non-issue.