I would like to comment on the subject of the 2nd Amendment and Gun Control. I composed a paper on this very subject in college and for many this issue is based on nothing more than one side or the others views or better yet manipulation of the data to help get their message across and their point of view across to people they can influence one way or the other.  The truth of this issue lies in the fact that those who support gun control do not wish to honor the Constitutional right of Americans to own and Bear arms when they legislate gun control thus most gun control laws do absolutely nothing to prevent crime, or criminals getting or using guns.  This fact has been verified by a Former Director of the ATFBE who served in this position for over thirty-five years. This gentleman even authored a book on the subject.  The gentleman I am talking about is named William Vizzard  Shots in the Dark: The Policy, Politics, and Symbolism of Gun Control is the name of the book.  I suggest everyone read it and then you will understand Gun Control is really about control of the law abiding citizen and every country in which this happens usually becomes a dictatorship.  Also I suggest you look at all the countries that signed the United Nations Small Arms Treaty and see how many are really dictatorships.  The 2nd Amendment ensures the citizens of the United States maintains the freedoms guaranteed under the United States Constitution. Remember who ever controls the Guns controls you.

Quote from: Harvey on February 07, 2014, 04:54:24 PM
I would like to comment on the subject of the 2nd Amendment and Gun Control. I composed a paper on this very subject in college and for many this issue is based on nothing more than one side or the others views or better yet manipulation of the data to help get their message across and their point of view across to people they can influence one way or the other.  The truth of this issue lies in the fact that those who support gun control do not wish to honor the Constitutional right of Americans to own and Bear arms when they legislate gun control thus most gun control laws do absolutely nothing to prevent crime, or criminals getting or using guns.  This fact has been verified by a Former Director of the ATFBE who served in this position for over thirty-five years. This gentleman even authored a book on the subject.  The gentleman I am talking about is named William Vizzard  Shots in the Dark: The Policy, Politics, and Symbolism of Gun Control is the name of the book.  I suggest everyone read it and then you will understand Gun Control is really about control of the law abiding citizen and every country in which this happens usually becomes a dictatorship.  Also I suggest you look at all the countries that signed the United Nations Small Arms Treaty and see how many are really dictatorships.  The 2nd Amendment ensures the citizens of the United States maintains the freedoms guaranteed under the United States Constitution. Remember who ever controls the Guns controls you.

Well said!

The Bill of rights is about limiting the power of government. It's not about limiting the rights of citizens. Just sayin. 

Quote from: Dan on February 16, 2014, 06:38:08 AM
The Bill of rights is about limiting the power of government. It's not about limiting the rights of citizens. Just sayin. 

That is exactly why democrats have a problem with the Constitution.

This is a repost from McFix on TPO.
Here is the United Nations writing up the gun confiscation program
for Barry. The UN bug is resistance to Agenda 21.
As far as I know, this is not a Hoax.
http://www.westernfreepress.com/2014/03/27/obamas-plan-to-disarm-america/

Quote from: Dan on February 16, 2014, 06:38:08 AM
The Bill of rights is about limiting the power of government. It's not about limiting the rights of citizens. Just sayin. 

Say just a little more, please! The ENTIRE Constitution is all about defining and limiting the powers of the newly-formed (at the time) national government. The first ten amendments contain specific principles that were felt by the Constitution's authors to be so fundamental to the existence of the Union that they didn't even need to be said. That's why they weren't embodied in the Constitution as first circulated for approval by the states. It was the states that insisted on what later became known as the Bill of Rights.

Thank God they did.

Quote from: supsalemgr on February 16, 2014, 08:26:30 AM
That is exactly why democrats have a problem with the Constitution.

A lot of Republicans don't grasp that either.  It's just on different issues. 

I'm getting tired of this "gun control" garbage. Do libtards not no that criminals don't follow the law? They'll just buy them illegally. All this statist, anti-american laws would do is persecute responsible gun owners.

Quote from: No Chance Without Paul on July 15, 2014, 08:09:08 PM
I'm getting tired of this "gun control" garbage. Do libtards not no that criminals don't follow the law? They'll just buy them illegally.

By that logic, we should open up our borders, because illegal immigrants demonstrably aren't going to follow the law; they'll just cross the border illegally.   

Quote from: Sci Fi Fan on July 26, 2014, 08:37:44 PMBy that logic, we should open up our borders, because illegal immigrants demonstrably aren't going to follow the law; they'll just cross the border illegally.   

For all practical purposes, they're wide open now.

Quote from: CG6468 on July 27, 2014, 07:22:07 AM
For all practical purposes, they're wide open now.

Not only wide open, but the Marxists is playing the part of a valet servant.

Quote from: Sci Fi Fan on July 26, 2014, 08:37:44 PM
By that logic, we should open up our borders, because illegal immigrants demonstrably aren't going to follow the law; they'll just cross the border illegally.   

False argument. Apples and oranges. Our immigration laws and border enforcement efforts (such as they are) are specifically designed to control the behavior of illegals. They do not apply to legal citizens, and seldom affect them in any way. Gun control laws, on the other hand, burden honest, law-abiding citizens much more than they do the criminals they're supposedly designed to impede.

I still say we need a 100 yard wide no man's zone, with orders to the Border Agents and the Military forces to shoot to kill any trespassers.

Quote from: CG6468 on July 27, 2014, 07:22:07 AM
For all practical purposes, they're wide open now.

And so it follows from my ad absurdum that we shouldn't bother doing anything about it, for the same reason you don't seem to think we should do anything about guns.

Quote from: TboneAgain on July 27, 2014, 11:02:58 AM
Gun control laws, on the other hand, burden honest, law-abiding citizens much more than they do the criminals they're supposedly designed to impede.

I see no reason why having to go through basic background checks to purchase a deadly weapon is a unreasonable burden.  You have to go through extensive testing (over 60 hours of recording activity here in Maryland) to be able to operate a motor vehicle.  Nor do I see the banning of heavy assault rifles for all those who don't possess some compelling reason to have them as any more unreasonable than requiring special permission to drive certain types of automobiles on public streets.  You substitute "alcohol", "driving", "smoking", "obtaining a green card" or "opening a restaurant" for "guns" in any argument and suddenly the nuts go away.

Of course, I'm assuming that you're talking about serious gun control propositions, and that you aren't simply strawmanning positions that have never gained a single vote in the legislature and have no serious chance of ever passing.  You surely know better than to do that.

Quote from: Sci Fi Fan on July 28, 2014, 01:54:05 PM
I see no reason why having to go through basic background checks to purchase a deadly weapon is a unreasonable burden.

As opposed to a non-deadly weapon?

It is a burden, because the government shouldn't be a barrier between a person and his or her firearms.  Seems simple to me.

Quote
You have to go through extensive testing (over 60 hours of recording activity here in Maryland) to be able to operate a motor vehicle.

Well, they do kill a lot more people.  Also, I can't find anything in the Second Amendment regarding drivers license.  Were you just being academic again?

Quote
  Nor do I see the banning of heavy assault rifles for all those who don't possess some compelling reason to have them as any more unreasonable than requiring special permission to drive certain types of automobiles on public streets.

Why should it matter if they have them or not?  The Second Amendment is pretty clear about this right to bear arms shall not be infringed upon.   Is it too complicated for you?

Quote
  You substitute "alcohol", "driving", "smoking", "obtaining a green card" or "opening a restaurant" for "guns" in any argument and suddenly the nuts go away.

Of course, I'm assuming that you're talking about serious gun control propositions, and that you aren't simply strawmanning positions that have never gained a single vote in the legislature and have no serious chance of ever passing.  You surely know better than to do that.

Huh?