We can enact common-sense gun safety standards that do not infringe the right of any law-abiding person who is not a terrorist, convicted violent felon, domestic abuser or mentally unstable to own firearms appropriate for sport or self-defense (not weapons more appropriate for the battlefield or SWAT teams).
If I suggest putting up a stop sign near a local school where kids have been getting hit by cars, the NRA thinks I’m trying to take away everyone’s automobiles.
If I suggest that maybe Formula One race cars are not appropriate for city streets, the NRA thinks I want to outlaw every kind of automobile.
Pretty succinct graphic statement of the situation. I’d put myself somewhere in the middle but a bit to the left of center. I would rather err on the side of caution.
HUMPF!! Who do those kids think they are anyway? Imagine wanting to be able to get an education without having to worry about some random nutcase opening fire on them with military-grade firepower! Well, I never…
The vast majority are in the middle. But the NRA puts out propaganda that any attempt at gun control amounts to complete confiscation and their purchased Congress critters vote accordingly. Funny thing is, the NRA doesn’t give as much as you’d think directly to Congress. They use far more money on propaganda like promoting the “coming to take your guns” nonsense.
Le Bron James supports the March For Our Lives crowd. But here he is having a grand old time playing with machine guns in Miami. Not semi-auto AR-15 rifles, but full on automatic weapons.
Is it going to be our future to live in a dystopian world where everyone walks around armed with military-style weapons and wearing body armor for protection?????
The melancholy fact is, the purpose of the Second Amendment was repealed over time and had essentially vanished by WW-I. It’s purpose was to “provide for the common defense” without recourse to those hallmarks of tyranny: conscription, mercenaries, or a standing army. The solution, as stated in the ignored first part, was “a well-regulated militia”. The “problem” with that is that it is a defensive system and you can’t build an empire minding your own business.
Now, I will agree that some restrictions need to be put on firearms sales.
So here’s the deal, when do we get to put some “common sense restrictions” on abortion?
I ask this, because many on liberals/progressives/leftists/Democrats say that Roe v. Wade is sacrosanct and no limitations can be put on it or abortion access. So explain to me the difference in being resistant to any changes?
DD Wiz Premium Member about 6 years ago
We can enact common-sense gun safety standards that do not infringe the right of any law-abiding person who is not a terrorist, convicted violent felon, domestic abuser or mentally unstable to own firearms appropriate for sport or self-defense (not weapons more appropriate for the battlefield or SWAT teams).
If I suggest putting up a stop sign near a local school where kids have been getting hit by cars, the NRA thinks I’m trying to take away everyone’s automobiles.
If I suggest that maybe Formula One race cars are not appropriate for city streets, the NRA thinks I want to outlaw every kind of automobile.
Sheesh!
wiatr about 6 years ago
Pretty succinct graphic statement of the situation. I’d put myself somewhere in the middle but a bit to the left of center. I would rather err on the side of caution.
Masterskrain Premium Member about 6 years ago
HUMPF!! Who do those kids think they are anyway? Imagine wanting to be able to get an education without having to worry about some random nutcase opening fire on them with military-grade firepower! Well, I never…
Sarc/off.Nantucket Premium Member about 6 years ago
The vast majority are in the middle. But the NRA puts out propaganda that any attempt at gun control amounts to complete confiscation and their purchased Congress critters vote accordingly. Funny thing is, the NRA doesn’t give as much as you’d think directly to Congress. They use far more money on propaganda like promoting the “coming to take your guns” nonsense.
Striped Cat about 6 years ago
I totally support the 2nd Ammendment. So let’s get started on that “well regulated” part.
Andylit Premium Member about 6 years ago
This one is perfect.
Annnnd…another anti-gun hypocrite.
Le Bron James supports the March For Our Lives crowd. But here he is having a grand old time playing with machine guns in Miami. Not semi-auto AR-15 rifles, but full on automatic weapons.
https://www.facebook.com/LockLoadMiami/photos/a.265877730235919.1073741838.178017875688572/265877826902576/?type=3&permPage=1
Radish the wordsmith about 6 years ago
Thanks to the liberal gun laws of Florida crafted by the NRA and GOP.
Radish the wordsmith about 6 years ago
No one is seriously suggesting ending the second amendment, that is a false statement.
Sadandconfused9 about 6 years ago
Is it going to be our future to live in a dystopian world where everyone walks around armed with military-style weapons and wearing body armor for protection?????
Mr. Blawt about 6 years ago
97% of the country favors the 2nd Amendment with some form of control.
RAGs about 6 years ago
The NRA thinks that a level piece of sandpaper is a “slippery slope”, and that banning 100 round magazines is greasing the slope.
Hippogriff about 6 years ago
The melancholy fact is, the purpose of the Second Amendment was repealed over time and had essentially vanished by WW-I. It’s purpose was to “provide for the common defense” without recourse to those hallmarks of tyranny: conscription, mercenaries, or a standing army. The solution, as stated in the ignored first part, was “a well-regulated militia”. The “problem” with that is that it is a defensive system and you can’t build an empire minding your own business.
DrDon1 about 6 years ago
Just what percentage of the population does Breen’s “Far Left” represent ( vs. the “Far Right” )?
"It's the End of the World!!!" Premium Member about 6 years ago
Now, I will agree that some restrictions need to be put on firearms sales.
So here’s the deal, when do we get to put some “common sense restrictions” on abortion?
I ask this, because many on liberals/progressives/leftists/Democrats say that Roe v. Wade is sacrosanct and no limitations can be put on it or abortion access. So explain to me the difference in being resistant to any changes?