Poll: Gun Owners More Likely to Find Fundamental Freedoms Essential Than Non-Owners

Discussion in 'Gun Control' started by rover77, Jun 23, 2017.

  1. rover77

    rover77 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2017
    Messages:
    845
    Likes Received:
    693
    Trophy Points:
    93
    Gender:
    Male
    Turtledude likes this.
  2. TheResister

    TheResister Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2015
    Messages:
    4,748
    Likes Received:
    608
    Trophy Points:
    113
    They are asking the wrong questions. As the most pro-gun member on this board, I can tell you that if you give most gun owners the right question, they will sell their Rights out for ten cents on the dollar and give you change.
     
  3. TOG 6

    TOG 6 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2015
    Messages:
    47,848
    Likes Received:
    19,638
    Trophy Points:
    113
    This is not a surprise, and it explains a lot of what we already knew about the anti-gun side -- they are more than happy to give up essential liberties for some modicum of safety provided by the state.
     
  4. TheResister

    TheResister Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2015
    Messages:
    4,748
    Likes Received:
    608
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Safety, control, or whatever pretext a person wants to use can marginalize the facts and justify in some peoples minds the supposed need for gun control. Whether gun control comes from the front door or through the ignorance of the masses via the back door, it is ineffective.

    The real takeaway is that most people don't understand Liberty and cannot appreciate it.
     
    Last edited: Jun 23, 2017
  5. DoctorWho

    DoctorWho Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2016
    Messages:
    15,501
    Likes Received:
    3,740
    Trophy Points:
    113
    More mere Hogwash.
     
    Last edited: Jun 23, 2017
  6. TheResister

    TheResister Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2015
    Messages:
    4,748
    Likes Received:
    608
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Just for chits and giggles, do YOU believe in unalienable Rights? Bear in mind what I just asked you. Unalienable Rights are not given to you by the government; therefore, you cannot have laws that impede or infringe on them. You'll have to solve your problems without infringing on the Rights of others. So?
     
  7. TheResister

    TheResister Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2015
    Messages:
    4,748
    Likes Received:
    608
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Let us rephrase the poll:

    Most gun owners understand their Rights and responsibilities far greater than the left that only wants to use the Constitution and the laws to get what they want.
     
  8. Galileo

    Galileo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2015
    Messages:
    2,860
    Likes Received:
    481
    Trophy Points:
    83
    [​IMG]

    Hmmm... not a big difference except in the case of gun ownership. I wonder what the margin of error is. It's possible that most of the discrepancies are not statistically significant. This reminds me of the thread about stereotypes by Vegas Giants.
     
  9. rover77

    rover77 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2017
    Messages:
    845
    Likes Received:
    693
    Trophy Points:
    93
    Gender:
    Male
    what is the 'right question'?
     
  10. DoctorWho

    DoctorWho Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2016
    Messages:
    15,501
    Likes Received:
    3,740
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I was not atacking you personally.

    However, I do not hide behind a computer keyboard either, I say what things are in person too.
     
  11. DoctorWho

    DoctorWho Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2016
    Messages:
    15,501
    Likes Received:
    3,740
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I was not clear enough.

    I am Not attacking you, only objecting to your blanket statement of generalized non specific
    Hogwash of all Gun owners.
    A group of people, violating forum rules.

    You want to make it personal.
    Not I.....
     
  12. DoctorWho

    DoctorWho Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2016
    Messages:
    15,501
    Likes Received:
    3,740
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Uh, yeah.....
    Civil Rights are something that belong to the people, can neither be given nor taken away.
     
  13. TheResister

    TheResister Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2015
    Messages:
    4,748
    Likes Received:
    608
    Trophy Points:
    113

    In a strict, lawyerly way, you have a point:

    http://www.wnd.com/2010/10/210525/

    You should pay close attention to that article. It has a meaning beyond this thread.

    OTOH, the thing that set off this POLICE STATE mentality with the right began around 2003 when the SPLC filed a suit and won the case involving undocumented foreigners trying to come into the U.S. improperly over private property. Essentially, the court ruled that the civil rights of undocumented foreigners trumped the Americans Right to defend their private property against trespassers.

    https://www.splcenter.org/seeking-justice/case-docket/leiva-v-ranch-rescue

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/08/20/AR2005082000922.html

    It's not quite as cut and dry as you'd like it to be.
     
  14. TheResister

    TheResister Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2015
    Messages:
    4,748
    Likes Received:
    608
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I would say fair enough, but I'd bet dollars against doughnuts that you would be willing to compromise your unalienable Rights under the right circumstances.
     
  15. TheResister

    TheResister Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2015
    Messages:
    4,748
    Likes Received:
    608
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I just had this discussion in another gun thread. IF I have to pose the question, it means that the OP is effectively derailed. So, let's let this thread progress and if you really want to know, PM me.
     
  16. DoctorWho

    DoctorWho Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2016
    Messages:
    15,501
    Likes Received:
    3,740
    Trophy Points:
    113
    NO !

    I am not giving up ANY RIGHTS !
    Under any circumstances.

    How hard is that to understand ?
    Un-alienable
    In-alienable
    Aliens from other planets.

    I just don't give a flying fig newton.
     
  17. TheResister

    TheResister Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2015
    Messages:
    4,748
    Likes Received:
    608
    Trophy Points:
    113
    As much as I am offended by the ACLU, they believe in the First Amendment so much that they defend their staunches enemies from censorship because the ACLU, on that one issue, believes in unalienable Rights. A case in point:

    Back in 1977, Frank Collin, a neo nazi enlisted the help of the ACLU to fight the local government when he was denied a permit to march in Skokie, Illinois. Jewish attorneys at the ACLU fought the case all the way to the United States Supreme Court and won.

    I tell you that because many gun control measures are wholly dependent upon National ID. The National ID / REAL ID Act - E-Verify is Hitler's tattoo idea on steroids. The legal theory of the people who obsess over immigration (and many are gun owners) is that Liberty is dependent upon citizenship and your willingness to obey the law. I contend that Liberty, an unalienable Right, applies to all men; that each of us is innocent until proven guilty; that our immigration laws cannot be used as a tool to prohibit people from coming here (Trump actually agreed with me on that last one.) Just as your minor traffic violations are not just cause to suspend the Fourth Amendment in order to prosecute for the times you sped, made an improper U Turn or parked illegally, I believe that we must stand for Liberty and not allow extremists to trash our Second Amendment Rights over minor immigration infractions.

    That means I have to be like the Jewish attorneys in the Skokie case, defending my enemies for the greater good of the Constitution. So, you're with me on this?
     
  18. DoctorWho

    DoctorWho Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2016
    Messages:
    15,501
    Likes Received:
    3,740
    Trophy Points:
    113
    So far yes, until you start to say a Right can be taken away.
    Nazis and others can talk, and until they actually start abridging Rights, such as a Crystal Nacht etc.....
    The KKK burning crosses
    Abuse of Gay Rights etc....
     
    Last edited: Jun 24, 2017
  19. TheResister

    TheResister Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2015
    Messages:
    4,748
    Likes Received:
    608
    Trophy Points:
    113
    "I " don't determine what Rights can or cannot be taken away. If the Right is unalienable, it is not within the purview of legislators, judicial officials, or the executive officers of the government to deny the Right. Now, my point was, the ACLU protects even their most ardent enemies in protection of the Right.

    OTOH, I have had some memorable battles with misguided people on the right who think that your unalienable Rights are dependent upon your citizenship and / or your willingness to obey every statutory law on the books. IF you stand up now, you will be the first person since I've been posting on this board. So, I say this again:

    The Rights enumerated in the Declaration of Independence were codified in the Bill of Rights. And, while it used to mean that the Constitution was to protect the whites (See Dred Scott v Sanford as an example), EVERY person falls under the jurisdiction of our Constitution as long as they are here, regardless of their race, color, creed, nationality, immigration status, religion, or political persuasion unless they are here for the purposes of criminality activity, waging wars, committing terrorism, etc.
     
  20. DoctorWho

    DoctorWho Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2016
    Messages:
    15,501
    Likes Received:
    3,740
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I do determine, No Rights can be taken away.
    Religious freedom, free speech, the Nazis free speech, the Right to keep and bear Arms, Gay Rights.....
    Rights, they are NOT Negotgiable.

    And if Nazis start killing Jews, Black People, Gays etc... In any order, under Government approval, then Arms needs be taken up against the Enemy.
     
    Last edited: Jun 24, 2017
  21. vman12

    vman12 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2015
    Messages:
    66,645
    Likes Received:
    46,476
    Trophy Points:
    113
    What question is that.
     
  22. vman12

    vman12 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2015
    Messages:
    66,645
    Likes Received:
    46,476
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Well that's a simple answer.

    They have no right to be here, and are not citizens of our country, therefore the rights of citizens override the rights of non-citizens.

    The government, if it does nothing else, is required to put the well-being of citizens over those of non-citizens.

    The primary question is, are they a citizen of this country. If not, then they are free to redress their concerns to THEIR government, not ours.

    Non-citizens illegally entering your country represents a threat to citizens of this country, in much the same way someone entering your house who does not belong there represents a similar threat.
     
    Last edited: Jun 24, 2017
  23. TheResister

    TheResister Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2015
    Messages:
    4,748
    Likes Received:
    608
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Here we go again:

    "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness." (an excerpt from the Declaration of Independence)

    We always go off on this tangent, but maybe we need to have this discussion as it really challenges the OP.

    When I was a kid we used to travel back and forth across the border to Mexico with nothing more than a couple of dollars and a driver's license. Our neighbors to the north AND the south pose no threat to us. As such, our neighbors pose no threat.

    But the key issue here is when you say "They have no right to be here." I'm sitting back and wondering who in the Hell died and made you people with an obsession over immigration God. Either all men are created equal and have unalienable Rights or they don't. Of course they have a Right to be here. Your claim is no greater unless unalienable Rights don't exist. And, if unalienable Rights do not exist - neither does the Right to keep and Bear Arms. The word unalienable has a meaning. It is one of the foundational principles upon which our Republic rests.

    Of course, people have a Right to be here. Maybe "you" didn't invite them, but those who provide them with jobs, rent to them, sell to them, and are willing to fight you for the Right to have sanctuary cities DID. And, whether you agree with them or not, you have to respect THEIR Rights. Our immigration laws can be used as a regulatory tool, but what you want is to utilize the immigration laws to deny your fellow American the equal protection of the laws.

    In doing so, you make the claim that unalienable Rights are dependent upon citizenship and / or a person's willingness to obey statutory laws (that even most Americans aren't obeying.) As a gun owner, I am prepared to challenge unconstitutional gun laws by pointing out that even the United States Supreme Court agrees with my presupposition:

    "The right there specified is that of "bearing arms for a lawful purpose." This is not a right granted by the Constitution. Neither is it in any manner dependent upon that instrument for its existence."

    United States v. Cruikshank, 92 U.S. 542 (1875)

    The Right to keep and bear Arms is an extension of the Right to Life. The Right to Life is one of the foundational principles upon which this Republic was founded just as the Right to Liberty is. Those Rights are ABOVE the jurisdiction of the legal system and they are not dependent upon the Constitution (so they sure as Hell are not dependent upon statutory laws that are subservient to the Constitution..)

    Dr. Who is about to find out how anti-freedom a LOT of gun owners really are.
     
  24. TheResister

    TheResister Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2015
    Messages:
    4,748
    Likes Received:
    608
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Let me comment on my above statement before the trolls get here.

    There is a culture problem and there is a problem with immigration. But, there are religionists here who belong to the Church of I Hate Illegal Immigrants and that hatred prevents them from being able to understand the issue we've been discussing in the last 23 posts.

    Those hatemongers that will show up hate, loathe and despise anything about immigration that does not begin with chanting the mantra about "illegal immigration." They are not going to care that I stipulate to the fact we have a problem with immigration, but it is not about illegal immigration. They are wanting to use the laws to deny people their unalienable Rights... both American and foreigner alike.

    Those people are dangerous and a threat to Liberty - just as much as any terrorist roaming our streets. See, we can address the issue and reduce the number of foreigners in America without the National Socialist solutions the people who obsess over the term "illegal immigration" bring to the table. But, I digress.
     
  25. DoctorWho

    DoctorWho Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2016
    Messages:
    15,501
    Likes Received:
    3,740
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Some...... a minority.
     

Share This Page