posted October 07, 2017 01:18 AM            

Over the years, the courts went back and forth on whether or not the right to bear arms was contingent upon being a member of a militia:

In Aymette v. State (1840), the court ruled that “citizens have an unqualified right to keep and bear arms.” In other words, the right applied to all individuals who were not required to be a member of a militia.

In U.S. v. Miller (1939) the court ruled that the 2nd Amendment “protects the right to bear arms only if the arms in question are those that would be useful as part of a civilian militia.”

Then, Justice Scalia in District of Columbia v. Heller (2008) stated that the 2nd Amendment “protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in the militia.”

posted October 07, 2017 02:33 AM            

Originally posted by jwhop

As for those who say they respect the 2nd Amendment Right to keep and bear arms...BUT who talk out of both sides of their mouths and secretly want to restrict the rights of law abiding citizens to do so. UP YOURS.

Taking the gun control aspect to the gun control thread

posted October 07, 2017 04:41 AM            

WHAT'S FALSE

The paper in question was not peer-reviewed, it didn't constitute a study, and it misrepresented separate research to draw shaky, unsupported conclusions.

posted October 07, 2017 09:48 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Catalina:
Moved from the Las Vegas thread
For jwhops edification .. because he asked me to quote him saying this

[b]Originally posted by jwhop

As for those who say they respect the 2nd Amendment Right to keep and bear arms...BUT who talk out of both sides of their mouths and secretly want to restrict the rights of law abiding citizens to do so. UP YOURS.

Taking the gun control aspect to the gun control thread

Sorry but your continued assertions that you know people's secret desires despite their words and actions.. is risible[/B]

---

I know you had to say something...after I challenged you to find a comment where I advocated for American citizens having the right to possess fully automatic rifles...and presumably..tanks, jet fighters and even nuclear weapons, but your response falls far short of finding any such comment made by me! Another failure!

"As for those who say they respect the 2nd Amendment Right to keep and bear arms...BUT who talk out of both sides of their mouths and secretly want to restrict the rights of law abiding citizens to do so. UP YOURS."

Further Catalina, I provided a partial list of leftist lunatic democrats advocating for the banning of guns in America...and even for the Repeal of the 2nd Amendment.

posted October 07, 2017 12:01 PM            

TheSecond specifically CALLS for regulation. So.. no rights being infringed by regulating arms. Sorry. Your response does not change what you said.

posted October 07, 2017 01:41 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Catalina:
Just responding to your request dearie

TheSecond specifically CALLS for regulation. So.. no rights being infringed by regulating arms. Sorry. Your response does not change what you said.

It just points up your willingness to fudge the facts in order to LOOK right. And your unwillingness to have s conversation that rises above the level of the sand pit.

---

Sorry but a non-answer is no answer at all.

Hmmm, people who read with comprehension would know it's the Militia which is to be regulated. Not the firearms they possess. Besides which, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed!

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.

posted October 07, 2017 04:04 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Randall:
Every time there's a mass shooting, the left crawls out from under rocks to politicize the tragedy and push their gun ban agenda.

---

posted October 07, 2017 06:24 PM            

Nowhere in the second amendment is it even implied that the guns are to protect against the state.. tbey were described as useful for protecting the state

posted October 08, 2017 12:51 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by AcousticGod:
Wah wah...another one bites the dust: http://www.snopes.com/harvard-flaw-review/

WHAT'S FALSE

The paper in question was not peer-reviewed, it didn't constitute a study, and it misrepresented separate research to draw shaky, unsupported conclusions.

---

AcousticGod, appreciate your digging into this. But, I expect our friends on the right do not consider Snopes to be a reliable source. Agreeing on who or what is a reliable source and agreeing on a set of facts is a major challenge to thoughtful, adult discourse here, as I'm sure you are aware.

posted October 08, 2017 04:23 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Node:
An astrologer [eric Francis] has posted a comprehensive article addressing this. There are many hyperlinks that also address many facets of the issue from different voices. He also dissects the charts involved.

check it out: http://planetwaves.net/astrologynews/1110771670-alt.html

EF is very good at this and I trust his research. I call it investigative astrological reporting.

---

Node, thanks for posting the link. False flag angle is chilling.

"Since 1970, more Americans have died from guns (including suicides, murders and accidents) than the sum total of all the Americans who died in all the wars in American history, back to the American Revolution."

"The American death toll of the Vietnam War, from 1955 to 1975, stands at 58,220. Every 633 days, that many Americans die of gunshot wounds."

quote:

---

These are jaw dropping facts.

---

Indeed.

posted October 08, 2017 10:13 AM            

And all kinds of Chemical, Electronic and Biological weapons to disable any number of well armed Civilians.

Thus, Semi-Automatics today have no reason to be in the hands of any Civilian, as they are being used only by mass killers to take out American Citizens.

Zero Handguns as you rightly pointed out will not eliminate crime. Let the Citizens push for banning Semi-Automatics alone. For now, just ban the infernal bump stocks.

------------------
Astrology Articles

posted October 08, 2017 01:54 PM            

Original reports were of shootings not just at Mandalay but other hotels too. People on the ground at the concert attest to shooters on the ground. Video shows shot flashes from other floors..

How much is true of either official or witness reports remains to be seen.. something doesn't add up

posted October 08, 2017 02:28 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Randall:
Actually, the Second Amendment was for the people to be able to fight an oppressive government, if need be. So, if we are going to talk about the intent of the founding fathers, let's get it right.

---

“The 2nd Amendment to the Constitution isn’t for just protecting hunting rights, and it’s not only to safeguard your right to target practice. It is a Constitutional right to protect your children, your family, your home, our lives, and to serve as the ultimate check against governmental tyranny — for the protection of liberty,”
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/dc/ted-cruz-second-amendment-government-tyranny

Having no knowledge of American or even world history, most of you ignorant leftist loons would make perfect little slaves of a tyrannical Marxist Communist Socialist government.

posted October 08, 2017 08:26 PM            

Further, you may want to hit your history and law books if you believe that nonsense about protecting against a tyrannical state. See Washinton's farewell specifcally, and look up militia laws while you are at it, and see what happens when militia members take aim at the government.

Guns are not banned in Chicago. Chicago tried and failed. Nor do their gun control laws apply to crimes mostly committed with illegal guns (which they've been collecting as fast as they can). Of course the problem is complicated by law enforcement failures and issues with racism in the police force. Trying to cite Chicago as an easy justification for the idea that gun control doesn't work betrays the myriad of issues affecting that scenario.

No one is blaming gun owners except in as much as gun owners insist on an unfettered right to all manner of weapon and the most minimal constraints put upon their sale. On this issue many, if not most, gun owners are guilty and can be seen as complicit. If they're offended, let them ensure the common sense measures they believe in are set into place. When neither the left nor the right can enact the gun controls they believe in, we have a problem...and that problem exists primarily due to the NRA. The right would have a ton more credibility if it handled the issues that primarily stem from its own beliefs.

Let's not forget the thing you're citing regarding the Mexican cartels began in a Republican administration. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Gunrunner

Peony, yes, they do try to dispute anything that they don't agree with, however, the case laid out by Snopes is pretty specific and exhaustive. Not only so, but one may do research on the subject, and find that those that have studied guns in the United States do not generally correspond with Conservative's beliefs on the issue.

Jwhop, there is no protection from the world's largest superpower. Washington himself warned against taking power by force in this country. There is no issue in not knowing history. You might also benefit from looking up what happens when militia members or other private citizens turn their guns on government officials.

posted October 09, 2017 12:46 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Randall:
All the deaths in tight gun control jurisdictions like Obama's home town and Hillary's birth place, Chicago, yet the left is still "ra ra gun control!"

---

Over the past decade, tight gun control in Chicago has been significantly weakened.

As Catalina has stated: In 2010, the Supreme Court struck down Chicago’s ban on handguns.

In 2013, the requirement for gun registry was eliminated. In the same year, the Illinois General Assembly passed a concealed carry law.

In 2014, a proposed ban on Chicago gun shops was denied.

And yet, White House press secretary, Sarah Huckabee Sanders, cited Chicago following the mass shooting in Las Vegas.

"One of the things that we don’t want to do is try to create laws that won’t stop these types of things from happening," Sanders said at a news conference. "I think if you look to Chicago where you had over 4,000 victims of gun-related crimes, they have the strictest gun laws in the country and that certainly hasn’t helped there.”

Compounding Chicago's problems is that many guns involved in crimes (60% according to police) are bought outside the city or state.

William Bratton, New York’s top cop in 1994, and Chicago police Superintendent, Garry McCarthy, agree that Chicago's fight against violence has been hurt due to lax gun laws.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/columnists/glanton/ct-m et-gun-control-chicago-dahleen-glanton-20171003-story.html

https://www.aol.com/article/news/2017/01/27/debunked-chicago-has-the-strictest-gun-laws-in-the/21701367/

posted October 09, 2017 01:18 AM            

I've been frustrated, because I hoped gun owners would come up with something more realistic/show more common sense when it comes to that. I hoped that maybe they could think about shaping gun laws that allow them to keep their hand guns, and hunting rifles, but take away the more dangerous elements, no stockpiling, etc.