Skip to main content

19 replies

Gun Nuts at it Again

B beternUOld Faithful
Gun Rights Advocates to March Against Phantom Threat

http://www.splcenter.org/blog/...inst-phantom-threat/

To be led by a collection of four especially nutty nuts:

"Gun rights advocates, including some in the antigovernment “Patriot” movement for whom the specter of gun restrictions is a recurring theme, are planning to march in Washington, D.C., and some individual states on April 19.

Speakers scheduled for the “Second Amendment March” in D.C. include

Stewart Rhodes, founder of Oath Keepers, a conspiracy-minded, antigovernment organization composed mostly of active-duty police and military officers and veterans;
Richard Mack, a former Arizona sheriff who travels the country preaching about the evils of the federal government;
Larry Pratt, executive director of Gun Owners of America, who advocated the formation of citizen militias in the United States in the early 1990s and addressed a three-day meeting of neo-Nazis and Christian Identity adherents in Colorado in 1992; and,
Nicki Stallard, a transsexual gun rights activist who is active in Pink Pistols, a gay gun rights organization."
Original Post

Replies sorted oldest to newest

B beternUOld Faithful
quote:
Originally posted by ferrellj:
It's funny how when you log on to TD forums and see the names of the threads that I can guess the poster before I even see it. Bitter, you're getting too predictable. What is your stance on the 2nd amendment? What is your stance on all the amendments?


I believe that private citizens have the right to keep and bear arms. I own a shotgun and a small-caliber handgun. The Supreme Court has confirmed that right. But the Court left latitude for some reasonable regulation relative to that right and there are reasonable regulations already being implemented. Guns can be and are prohibited in many public buildings. Private property ownere--both residential and commercial--have the right to prohibit guns being brought onto their properties. The courts of this nation are properly empowered to prohibit certain convicted criminals from bearing arms. Insane persons can and should be prohibited from keeping and bearing arms.

The problem I have with the gun lobby is their notion that "shall not be infringed" means no limits whatsoever, or nearly so. An additional irritant is the paranoia arising from the election of our current President and the alarmist bayhoo that gun extremists have generated since his election. It sure has been good for sales of guns and ammo, though!
D dolemitejbHall of Famer
While I support the Second Amendment, my view of it is slightly different than most. I don’t want the government further infringing upon it, but I do not believe it has been upheld in any absolute sense for quite some time.

The text says:

quote:
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.


The amendment mentions arms, not guns. “Arms” comes from the Latin “arma,” meaning weapons. It shares the same etymological root as “army” and “armory.” It could be argued that the people who wrote the second amendment felt that the people should be armed at a level equal to that of their government. At the time, military weapons and personal weapons weren’t very different. Well, even the staunchest NRA member doesn’t actually think the public should have the same stuff the army has. I can’t own missiles. So, where is the line? I don’t support weapons bans, but some do. When they speak up in favor of these bans, the second amendment is cited. Would anyone support my second amendment right to own some nukes?
ferrelljferrelljOld Faithful
quote:
Originally posted by beternU:
quote:
Originally posted by ferrellj:
It's funny how when you log on to TD forums and see the names of the threads that I can guess the poster before I even see it. Bitter, you're getting too predictable. What is your stance on the 2nd amendment? What is your stance on all the amendments?


I believe that private citizens have the right to keep and bear arms. I own a shotgun and a small-caliber handgun. The Supreme Court has confirmed that right. But the Court left latitude for some reasonable regulation relative to that right and there are reasonable regulations already being implemented. Guns can be and are prohibited in many public buildings. Private property ownere--both residential and commercial--have the right to prohibit guns being brought onto their properties. The courts of this nation are properly empowered to prohibit certain convicted criminals from bearing arms. Insane persons can and should be prohibited from keeping and bearing arms.

The problem I have with the gun lobby is their notion that "shall not be infringed" means no limits whatsoever, or nearly so. An additional irritant is the paranoia arising from the election of our current President and the alarmist bayhoo that gun extremists have generated since his election. It sure has been good for sales of guns and ammo, though!


While I may not agree with everything the gun lobby does (I don't always agree with my wife), without groups like the NRA working everyday to protect our 2nd amendment rights they would be gone by now. Given the direction this country and administration is going it would be foolish to not stock up on weapons and ammo.
Renegade NationRenegade NationHall of Famer
quote:
Originally posted by dolemitejb:
Would anyone support my second amendment right to own some nukes?


Well...yeah Smiler but I guess since Iran can't have them neither can you...

Seriously though...beternU in his original post cited several groups as anti-government and what not...as though that is a bad thing.

We can debate the exact meaning of this phrase or that phrase in the 2nd Amendment...but one thing that is absolutely clear...even though not talked about...is that the Founders intended for the people to be armed specifically
to defend themselves against tyrannical government.

You can call that nutty, crazy, or whatever...but in a historical context...that is the main jest of the 2nd Amendment.
ferrelljferrelljOld Faithful
quote:
Originally posted by Renegade Nation:
quote:
Originally posted by dolemitejb:
Would anyone support my second amendment right to own some nukes?


Well...yeah Smiler but I guess since Iran can't have them neither can you...

Seriously though...beternU in his original post cited several groups as anti-government and what not...as though that is a bad thing.

We can debate the exact meaning of this phrase or that phrase in the 2nd Amendment...but one thing that is absolutely clear...even though not talked about...is that the Founders intended for the people to be armed specifically
to defend themselves against tyrannical government.

You can call that nutty, crazy, or whatever...but in a historical context...that is the main jest of the 2nd Amendment.


Exactly 100% correct. It didn't say our right to hunt deer and rabbit shall not be infringed.
CageTheElephantCageTheElephantPost Master
Good post, I think.
Got me to doing some research.
And, after doing numerous Internet reading on "Oath Keepers", "Richard Mack", "Larry Platt"...etc. PLUS knowing for years about the SPLC, and ol' Morris...and their "stance", I could easily be comfortable with these groups "marching".
Keep the Government "alert".
I have no problem inserting "Britannia" in place of "U.S. Government"..."UN", nor do I have a problem inserting "Hamilton", "Madison" or "Washington" for the names.
As for the "rabid" militia's"...well, I kinda think of the "Neo-Nazi's" as being the front line, expendable cannon fodder, that would have to be "cleansed" before the true Patriots stepped in.
dogsoldier0513dogsoldier0513Old Faithful
Main Entry: in·fringe
Pronunciation: \in-ˈfrinj\
Function: verb
Inflected Form(s): in·fringed; in·fring·ing
Etymology: Medieval Latin infringere, from Latin, to break, crush, from in- + frangere to break — more at break
Date: 1513
transitive verb
1 : to encroach upon in a way that violates law or the rights of another
2 obsolete : defeat, frustrate
intransitive verb
: encroach —used with on or upon

Add Reply

Post
affilated websites:
Times Daily | Decatur Daily | Courier Journal | The Hartselle Enquirer | Moulton Advertiser | The Redstone Rocket | The Madison Record | The Franklin County Times | Reach256 | TNValleyStuff.com TNValleyHomefinder.com | TNValleyWheels.com

Terms of Service | Private Policy | California Privacy Policy/Private Policy

Untitled Document

Membership Required

We're sorry. You must be signed in to continue. Sign In or Register
×
Are you sure you want to remove from your Block List?
×
Loading...
×
When you block a person, they can no longer invite you to a private message or post to your profile wall. Replies and comments they make will be collapsed/hidden by default. Finally, you'll never receive email notifications about content they create or likes they designate for your content.
Note: if you proceed, you will no longer be following .
×
Advanced Search
Advanced Search
Link copied to your clipboard.
×