This is total BS from someone that swore to uphold the constitution........
Biden says Second Amendment is 'not absolute' in call to reinstate assault weapons ban
Biden said Congress should reinstate an assault weapons ban, raise the purchase age for firearms, and pass red flag gun laws
President Biden said the
Second Amendment is "not absolute" in a speech Thursday following a wave of mass shootings across the nation, pleading with to Congress to pass what he called "commonsense" gun control legislation, including reinstating an assault weapons ban, requiring background checks, and limiting magazine capacity.
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/biden-a...eapons-ban
If only you were as outraged over the loss of needless life as you are for the possible loss of your bang-bang toys.
Obviously, most people, except extreme Libertarians, agree with Biden that the 2nd Amendment is not absolute. The real debate in the United States isn't whether there should be no restrictions at all on what kind of weapons a person can possess. The real debate is where to draw the line. Somewhere between "no guns at all" and "anything goes" is where the actual debate is. So, strictly speaking, the great majority of people do agree with Biden.
(06-03-2022, 05:25 AM)captivating Wrote: [ -> ]If only you were as outraged over the loss of needless life as you are for the possible loss of your bang-bang toys.
Democrats don't care about the loss of life. They only care when someone white kills some people and then they use it to try and control everyone more.
You want examples? Look at every gun free zone and see how many criminals shot each other and sometimes bystanders. Look at Chicago for the shining example of taking guns away. NYC is heading back there. Detroit, Atlanta, etc. Every city, every gun law doesn't work and the criminals keep killing people because they are CRIMINALS.
Clean up crime first in your own home dem for life cities and then we can talk about guns.
Sent from my SM-S901U using Tapatalk
(06-03-2022, 05:25 AM)captivating Wrote: [ -> ]If only you were as outraged over the loss of needless life as you are for the possible loss of your bang-bang toys.
Those psychos would kill people regardless of tool used.
I could walk into any stadium with a stiletto blade, cut about 50 peoples femoral arteries before the first scream started.
(06-03-2022, 06:29 AM)p_rushing Wrote: [ -> ] (06-03-2022, 05:25 AM)captivating Wrote: [ -> ]If only you were as outraged over the loss of needless life as you are for the possible loss of your bang-bang toys.
Democrats don't care about the loss of life. They only care when someone white kills some people and then they use it to try and control everyone more.
You want examples? Look at every gun free zone and see how many criminals shot each other and sometimes bystanders. Look at Chicago for the shining example of taking guns away. NYC is heading back there. Detroit, Atlanta, etc. Every city, every gun law doesn't work and the criminals keep killing people because they are CRIMINALS.
Clean up crime first in your own home dem for life cities and then we can talk about guns.
Sent from my SM-S901U using Tapatalk
I don't disagree with your conclusion, but the evidence you're offering is bad.
Chicago suffers from guns that were legally purchased in Indiana and other parts of Illinois, then legally brought in to Chicago.
What Chicago proves is that a jurisdiction that doesn't have some kind of border control will have a very hard time enforcing a gun restriction on its own.
It proves nothing about whether the US as a whole could enforce the restriction well or not.
It's amazing how the public schools system has been weaponized by the government to create a class of illiterates who so struggle with the English language that they cannot grasp the meaning of a simple 4 word phrase.
(06-03-2022, 10:11 AM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ]It's amazing how the public schools system has been weaponized by the government to create a class of illiterates who so struggle with the English language that they cannot grasp the meaning of a simple 4 word phrase.
I agree. No one understands what "a well regulated militia" means.
(06-03-2022, 05:25 AM)captivating Wrote: [ -> ]If only you were as outraged over the loss of needless life as you are for the possible loss of your bang-bang toys.
NONE of the proposed laws would have stopped these shootings. Lets be real, the left wants to disarm Americans so they can do whatever they want without fear from the people. Just like Cuba, Venezuela, and every other crappy 3rd world country. The elites do not want anyone to be able to threaten their power.
The second Amendment IS absolute, PERIOD... Give them an inch and they will take the whole mile.
(06-03-2022, 10:15 AM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ] (06-03-2022, 10:11 AM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ]It's amazing how the public schools system has been weaponized by the government to create a class of illiterates who so struggle with the English language that they cannot grasp the meaning of a simple 4 word phrase.
I agree. No one understands what "a well regulated militia" means.
Absolutely. If they did they would support individuals having access to the weaponry of the standing army against which the militia is the bulwark.
(06-03-2022, 10:50 AM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ] (06-03-2022, 10:15 AM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]I agree. No one understands what "a well regulated militia" means.
Absolutely. If they did they would support individuals having access to the weaponry of the standing army against which the militia is the bulwark.
The second amendment says that the federal government can not stop states from forming well regulated militias. Together with the 5th and 14th it says that, to help the militia, neither the state nor the federal government can take your weapons nor prevent you from carrying them without "due process of law." It does not create a right for anyone to buy or acquire whatever weapon they want. Only keep and bear, not buy, procure, or acquire. And "due process of law" is one of the most hotly debated concepts in constitutional law.
Gun Grabbers have been trying to use the "militia" part to try and to say they have right to restrict our right as Americans to own a gun. ITS A BS ARGUMENT and has already been decided by the Supreme Court.
In the 2008 case District of Columbia v. Heller, the Supreme Court held that the "Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home."
As a gun owner I have to facepalm every time I look at gun control discussions. The second amendment is about maintaining state militias because the nation was founded on the idea that there would be no standing army, and the state militias would be conscripted as the national army if needed. The idea that the second amendment is about unlimited private gun ownership is a recent idea. While guns in the United States have never been particularly uncommon, the meme of the second amendment saying anyone should be able to own as many guns of as many types as they want is wrong.
(06-03-2022, 01:38 PM)SeldomRite Wrote: [ -> ]As a gun owner I have to facepalm every time I look at gun control discussions. The second amendment is about maintaining state militias because the nation was founded on the idea that there would be no standing army, and the state militias would be conscripted as the national army if needed. The idea that the second amendment is about unlimited private gun ownership is a recent idea. While guns in the United States have never been particularly uncommon, the meme of the second amendment saying anyone should be able to own as many guns of as many types as they want is wrong.
Mostly correct. The 14th amendment definitely expands the meaning of the 2nd, though.
So Brandon is calling for banning high powered .22 caliber semi-automatic rifles because they are "scary", yet he implies that .22 caliber is not harmful. He also calls a 9mm projectile a "large caliber" bullet.
What exactly is the difference between an AR-15 projectile and a .22 LR projectile? Nothing.
How big of a difference is there between 5.56mm and 9mm? Not much.
This inept administration regime is so out of touch with reality.
(06-03-2022, 01:55 PM)jagibelieve Wrote: [ -> ]So Brandon is calling for banning high powered .22 caliber semi-automatic rifles because they are "scary", yet he implies that .22 caliber is not harmful. He also calls a 9mm projectile a "large caliber" bullet.
What exactly is the difference between an AR-15 projectile and a .22 LR projectile? Nothing.
How big of a difference is there between 5.56mm and 9mm? Not much.
This inept administration regime is so out of touch with reality.
Bingo!!
(06-03-2022, 01:38 PM)SeldomRite Wrote: [ -> ]As a gun owner I have to facepalm every time I look at gun control discussions. The second amendment is about maintaining state militias because the nation was founded on the idea that there would be no standing army, and the state militias would be conscripted as the national army if needed. The idea that the second amendment is about unlimited private gun ownership is a recent idea. While guns in the United States have never been particularly uncommon, the meme of the second amendment saying anyone should be able to own as many guns of as many types as they want is wrong.
Wrong... I just illustrated in my above post. Here it is again since reading is not a strong point of yours.
In the 2008 case
District of Columbia v. Heller, the Supreme Court held that the "Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home."
(06-03-2022, 01:55 PM)jagibelieve Wrote: [ -> ]So Brandon is calling for banning high powered .22 caliber semi-automatic rifles because they are "scary", yet he implies that .22 caliber is not harmful. He also calls a 9mm projectile a "large caliber" bullet.
What exactly is the difference between an AR-15 projectile and a .22 LR projectile? Nothing.
How big of a difference is there between 5.56mm and 9mm? Not much.
This inept administration regime is so out of touch with reality.
The kinetic energy and downrange accuracy of each of those rounds are vastly different. You have to look at the charge as well as the diameter. You are just playing ignorant though, right? Please tell me you already knew this.