Michael Ramirez for September 14, 2019

Most of the shots from the USA shooter are going into innocent people.

So the whole constitution was about your right to own a rapid firing people killer.

Considering some 90+ % of people want stricter background checks (even NRA members) and a huge majority want stricter regulations on firearms, and only 5% of GUN OWNERS are NRA members, its the NRA (read manufacturers) who blow holes in that “Well regulated militia” part of the constitution.

I suspect that Ramirez is responding to Beto’s diatribe. Typical of him, he’s tarring all Democrats as though they all agreed.

What’s the worst thing that could happen if you had to give up your assault weapons? Would you lose your life? Your manhood? Your wife? Would the world come to an end? Or would you find, after you got over being pissed off (if ever), that nothing, really, was different… except you wouldn’t worry so much about assholes w/ assault weapons shooting up a crowd.

Ramirez is another one whose experience (military and other wise) I wonder about. Does he have anything to base his distorted views on?

Another concentrated pellet of BS.

like Trump and Bush upheld the Constitution to the letter. In fact it was Bush who actually said the Constitution is nothing but words on a piece of paper.

I’m sure Mr. Ramirez is okay with school children behind armored doors, with armored backpacks experiencing PTSD! Builds character!

The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing. – Edmund Burke. The corrupt media typically won’t report on the instances where shooters and other criminals have been stopped by the legally armed citizen. As AOC’s ex chief of staff freely admitted that the drive against climate change is really about gaining ‘control’ of the economy, so is the drive against so-called ‘assault rifles’, etc an incremental step toward gun confiscation, the same effort successfully applied against the citizens of Cuba, Germany, etc. Progress by the Left means incremental steps toward the totalitarian state. Guard our freedoms. Oh, and our nation must return to God.

The 2nd amendment is the ONLY part of the Constitution that the older Republicans seem to care about. The Gen-Y and Gen-Z voters will have a different view and might ask for its repeal when they have a Congress full of their representatives.

By the time Trump gets done with the Constitution there will nothing left for anyone to shoot at.

History tells us that racist/eugenics-leaning nationalists rather than constitutional democratic-republicans are more likely to take people’s guns away.

It’s interesting to note that while most gun owners say they need a gun to protect themselves from their fellow Americans, most won’t join a service (military, law enforcement) to protect their fellow Americans. It’s almost as if they see their fellow Americans as the enemy.

What does that make a person who distrusts everyone else around to the point of needing to be armed against them?

In May of 1994, President Ronald Reagan wrote to the United States House of Representatives in support of banning “semi-automatic assault guns.”

The federal Assault Weapons Ban was enacted in September 1994.

Violent crime went down for every year the ban was in effect.

In 2017 68% of Americans supported banning assault weapons, including 48% of registered gun owners and 77% of non-gun owners, and 38% of Republicans who own guns and 66% of Democrats who own guns.

https://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2017/06/22/americas-complex-relationship-with-guns

This here is what we call horse-puckey in these parts.

Hmmm.. it appears that law enforcement is battling both the criminals and the Left at the same time, and losing at both. Case in point, Baltimore Maryland and Portland Oregon. I can’t generalize that most gun owners won’t join a military or law enforcement service as there are age restrictions in both. A rhetorical question – are we aware of any studies showing that the average available and qualified armed citizen would refrain from doing so in any case?

Repeating here: It was good to see a recent reasoned and respectful discussion between Sen. Cruz and Ms. Milano. Would that this forum have that constructive and respectful tone in place of snark and ignorance.

Oh dear, Ramirez just can’t help lying. What can we do for him to get him to read what was said?

Many everyday Americans in the U.S. are more concerned with issues others than guns, such as having affordable health care, paying the bills without holding down 2 jobs, etc. Others of us care about the trashing of voting rights and the rise of violent racist/sexist/nationalist movements. Still others look at climate change and see potential hope in a plan (not a law) such as the Green New Deal, which can put many people in decent paying jobs as a side benefit.

Zoomer and Conservatus are delusional if they think ordinary citizens with war weapons would defeat a modern military. These war weapons are not for hunting anything except people. They have no other use.

Are you at war with the federal government? Do you want to be? If so, that’s a serious crime. Flawed as it is, our system can be changed at the ballot box.

The reality is that the mentally ill use them for mass murder, usually catalyzed by right wing regressive hate speech.

Kill the Jews!

Kill the Muslims!

Kill the brown people!!

These sick grievances are more obvious than the fear and paranoia from the likes of Conservus and the Zoomer. These two are like the Bundys (not Ted, though you never know). First they graze their cattle on public (i.e. EVERYBODY’S) land while refusing to pay nominal grazing fees. Then they claim the federal government is an evil force without the right to protect federal land. Then they provoke an armed standoff. Then they are taken to court, where they lose. Silly in the extreme.

No, Conservus, we don’t live in the 1700’s. The world is a much different place. You don’t have any legitimate reason to own war weapons. Sorry dude, maybe it’s too obvious for you to grasp, but reality is what I respond to. Not racist and paranoid fantasies about brown people, Jews, Muslims, or our federal government.

IF ANYONE HAS RIDDLED THE Constitution is the @sshole in the WH! Demented, evil and fake!

As to shooting holes in the Constitution, I think Hair Furor and Moscow Mitch are doing just fine on their own, thank you.

I found this item gratifying and amusing; https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/companies/nascar-shocks-gun-industry-with-souvenir-program-ad-ban/ar-AAHfPGv?

Machine-guns where reclassified (titled) in 1934, because of their extreme firepower. The constitution was not damaged, it was managed. Technology has introduced a new threat to public safety in the form of high rate of fire semi-autos. The unaddressed issue is, these high technology firearms are currently classified exactly the same as a single shot .22. That is not right.

I believe the way forward is reclassification of high capacity, high cyclic rate, firearms as titled weapons. Reclassification does not require any buy backs, or bans, or confiscations. What it will require is a higher standard of ownership. Titling of “assault” weapons would end private sales for these guns, but still allow non-titled guns to be bought and sold as we do now.

As the country grows so should the constitution…breathe.

Yet trump welcomes foreign interference in our elections and refuses to comply with the emoluments clause. Quite a blind spot you’ve got there.

Offhand.. from this side of the fence.. it appears that the trump team is shredding that Constitution on a daily basis.. But sure.. blame the Democrats

Ramirez is right, questioning one small part of one short phrase in one amendment is exactly the same as destroying the whole entire Constitution. (‘Cause the Constitution really doesn’t say anything else….)

Nice one, Ramirez. Terrific work.

You grossly misinterpret the 2nd amendment.And the left panel should be all the children killed by you amosexuals.

It’s sad how little history the “Second Amendment” people know. When George Washington was President, he led an army of militias to put down anti-government rebellion.

Throughout Western Pennsylvania counties, protesters used violence and intimidation to prevent federal officials from collecting the tax. Resistance came to a climax in July 1794, when a U.S. marshal arrived in western Pennsylvania to serve writs to distillers who had not paid the excise. The alarm was raised, and more than 500 armed men attacked the fortified home of tax inspector General John Neville. Washington responded by sending peace commissioners to western Pennsylvania to negotiate with the rebels, while at the same time calling on governors to send a militia force to enforce the tax. Washington himself rode at the head of an army to suppress the insurgency, with 13,000 militiamen provided by the governors of Virginia, Maryland, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whiskey_Rebellion

And then there was Shay’s Rebellion: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shays%27_Rebellion

That occurred before the Constitutional Convention.

The idea that the founding fathers would build in the right to anti-government rebellion is just ignorance and stupidity.

He is using an automatic pistol, designed by a socialist Austrian. Where is his good old American revolver?

Well, one Democrat has actually come out and said that certain kinds of weapons should be illegal (as, already, machine guns already are, and have been for a generation or two). Only slightly less than half of the American people agree.

The second amendment is the whole constitution for the Right. … The right to vote is in the constitution too… but they love putting all types of regulations and obstacles on that. gtfoh.

Most people that hide behind the US Constitution like to pick and choose the parts they like and ignore the parts they don’t like.

They were talking about musket loaders not the 13 bullets per second the right wing terrorists use to shoot up Walmarts.

Jesus Christo, you ignorant, lying piece of scum, Ramirez! Do you feel any responsibility to be accurate? Do you EVER check a fact? I just googled “us criminals shot by citizens vs innocent victims” and debunked your paranoid piece of sh!+ cartoon in 10 seconds. I’ll be glad to help. Here’s the first result:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/06/19/guns-in-america-for-every-criminal-killed-in-self-defense-34-innocent-people-die/

Oh, forgive me. I forgot. The Washington Post is part of the lamestream, fake news, libtard media.

Trump and the Republicans have trampled all over the Constitution, disrupting the separation of powers to keep an orange tyrant in power so they can steal the Supreme Court. As well they are trying to eliminate the separation of church and state. Un-American Republicans are waging war against the Constitution and the American people. They will risk your life to keep their NRA bribes.

So Beto wants to take all of the AK-47s and AR-15s from their legal owners with a massive, mandatory government buy-back program. Somebody help me here, because I don’t see how that takes the guns out of the hands of criminals.

Just tell me. What about a ban on bump stocks, semi-automatic weapons, and large-capacity magazines, as well as background checks, violates the 2nd Amendment? For that matter, why do think that the 2nd Amendment shouldn´t be repealed. In Japan, where gun deaths are very low, private gun ownership is constitutionally ILLEGAL.

Even Miller in its twisted logic recognizes the individual right. All SCOTUS 2A decisions recognize that the individual right is NOT linked to the militia.

I see that someone above fails to understand that the mass shooters got their weapons through dealers.

If the dealers don’t have the mass killing guns, it becomes harder for criminals of all sorts to get the guns.

After all, how many killings are done with Thompson machine guns these days?

Surprisingly enough enforced regulations do work, as shown by the 1934 ruling and the 1994 action.

And nobody came to seize my pistols in 1994, not even my semi-automatic Ruger.

More deranged than trump!

Conservatives are always in favor of the constitution, except when they aren’t. My conservative friends frequently share a FB meme demanding that Trump issue an executive order to end the birth-right citizenship “policy”. When I pointed out to one that Sheriff Arpaio’s habit of pulling over anyone with brown skin and demanding they show proof of citizenship is unconstitutional, one just replied “we need to stop being nice to them”! Nice? Following constitution?

Even right wing Justice Scalia didn’t say that there was any Constitutional right to an AR-15. And the Constitution only mentions the right to bear arms within the context of a “well regulated militia”. Ramirez as usual is right wing clueless.

This is dumb even on the Ramirez scale.

Come on, guys. You should know better than to feed the Zom troll.