There wasn't anything there substantiating your claim. The first appearance of Birtherism was on the free republic. If you can find Hillary or someone from her campaign making a statement prior to that post in March let me know.
No we already established this. He's perfectly okay with illegal immigrants. Since he has no intention of ever allowing them to become legal or fix the immigration process to allow people to come here legally without having to wait decades for a green card.
Horses aren't really a weapon. People don't kill other people WITH horses. They may use horses while they use an actual weapon to kill someone, but horses are transportation and utility. The right to have them goes without saying. But I would imagine that the British trying to ban guns in the colonies is really what led to the 2nd amendment being included. I don't think the British tried to ban horses. Where else would your rights come from? The rights we have in America come from the fact that we have enshrined them as law with the government as the enforcer. No law, no America, no rights. And the government is not it's own entity, it's made up of people. Those people, living and dead, are the ones who determined the rights you have. You didn't get rights just because you're alive. Otherwise, animals would all have rights too. Bacteria even. Life does not mean rights. Rights only come from a society that has collected itself together and created laws that govern them. Laws that say what your rights are, and are not.
Trump???? I truly hope that those supporting this media clown in this thread aren't serious. Trump, is a has been from the the land of bankruptcy whose only purpose for his the announcement is to build his media empire. Hard to imagine he has the parts to try this silliness again - - - Updated - - - Trump can't even deal Trump a winning hand. Media prostitution at its finest
1. What did Obama do to make the market rise? Please be specific. 2. If only Trump could pass a law making everyone use his services/products.
Exactly! That's why the founding fathers put the 2nd Amendment in the Bill of Rights and without any regulations attached to it. So, why are you now wanting to limit our access to weapons?????
I suspect that our friend who might lean right have the where with all to clearly see Trump for what he is. He has no chance in the grand scheme of Presidential politics, and he clearly know this. Cheering for Trump is akin to cheering Sharpton for Pres, NEVER GONNA HAPPEN
What a bunch of crap. We are endowed by our "Creator with certain unalienable Rights", where the definition of "unalienable" is "unable to be taken away from or given away by the possessor." Our rights don't come from laws or politicians. The only responsibility the government has with regards to our rights is to protect them, not change them or abolish them.
Because you don't need assault weapons or bigger, the British have stayed on their island for 200 years now, Canada's not exactly beating down our door, and even without counting assault rifles and bigger weapons we still have more guns than Mexico. It brings no benefit. You can protect yourself just fine with non-assault style weaponry. In all the stories I've heard of gun owners stopping an incident with their guns, I've never seen someone say "yeah I was able to end the situation, but if I'd been carrying my fully automatic rifle with grenade launcher and an SMAW on my back at the Walmart with me, I could have really ended the situation". I'm perfectly fine with reasonable restrictions. And I stand by that. There are places in the world you can go live in if you want unfettered access to weaponry. You probably don't want to actually live in those places though, do you?
So, your view of the world is the reason why politicians should limit our rights? What kind of selfish asinine thinking is that? And the 2nd Amendment is not just about foreign invaders, it's also about a possible enemy from within (aka tyrannical government).
So the words on a piece of paper written by humans says your rights come from an as-of-yet unseen, unspoken, and non-present creator? Well, where do you think the creator came from? Humans! They wrote about him too. Writing something down does not make it an objective part of the universe. I know, I've tried. My closet is full of notebooks where I have carefully scribed "I want a money tree" over and over again, but I'm still waiting. It's fine if you want to believe in a creator and it's fine if you want to believe there are rights bestowed on you from it, but that doesn't make it real or applicable to anyone but yourself in your own mind. God isn't exactly here backing up these inalienable rights, is he? There are no rights without enforcement of those rights, or rights have no meaning. I could just say "I have the right to blah blah blah whatever" and that would make it true. But a simple look around through...well...all of history will tell you that's not the way it works or has ever worked. Your rights didn't exist before the law of this land created them. At least not in this land they didn't. Some of them may have existed in other parts of the world, but only because those societies codified them into law as well.
It's not just my view or your rights wouldn't be limited now, would they? If this society felt as a majority that there should be no laws or restrictions of any kind, that's how it would be. The government couldn't stop it. The government IS the people. Right now, in this country, if the majority of folks wanted change, we would have it. But typing on the internet that you want change is not actually working FOR change. If people want change, if people want more rights, they have to change the laws that give them. That requires action, not just words. If or when enough of the people who agree with you reach the point where it's worth action instead of words, you will have your unrestricted wonderland. Briefly at least, before it comes crashing down. (EDIT: And just to clarify here, I'm not talking armed revolution. I'm talking about peaceful action through the legislative process).
"Enforcement"? Don't you mean "exercise"? If you can't "exercise" your rights, then you have no rights.
Enforcement is required for anyone to have the ability to exercise their rights. Enforcement does not have to mean that someone from the government is standing there with you. It just means that if someone tried to infringe on those rights, you would have the law on your side. You would have recourse. Ideally anyway. Being that we're all people, it doesn't always work out that way.
That's right, his casino, not him personal. He has a net worth between 4 and 9 billion. His bankruptcy wasn't because he's broke, it was a business manuever.
Which I will take over a community organizer or someone who thinks it is owed them. Hillary and Jeb. - - - Updated - - - More than Hillary with all of her scandals?
Not every law is a right, but every right is a law. You have the right to own a weapon because the law of this land says you do. You have the right to due process because the law says you do. If those laws did not exist, you would not have the right to expect them in this society. Rights are a creation of society. If you live outside of a society somehow, you could be said to have every right or no rights and both situations would be effectively equal. If you choose to live IN a society or within the boundaries of territory that society controls, you're also choosing to be a part of that society's laws and systems and you'll have whatever rights that society has afforded you with them. But if you think rights just exist naturally or were created by a higher power and are above humanity, you're welcome to provide your proof. Nobody has yet done so, and said higher power hasn't shown up to enforce any of them, so that's why humans have always and will always decide what rights people will have within their respective societies.
Hummm..... Barack Obama ran GM and Chrysler into the ground and forced them into bankrupcy in less than six months! - - - Updated - - - I see you're catching on. That's the smartest thing you've ever said on PF.
That didn't take long. lol http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m.../donald-trump-says-us-gdp-never-negative-ter/
