Another Obama Attack on the Second Amendment!

Page 2 of 8 [ 114 posts ] Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 8 Next

Previous topic | Next topic

simon_says
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 20 Jan 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,075

05 Apr 2012, 2:26 pm

Hopefully this thread is a joke.

Joker
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 19 Mar 2011
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,593
Location: North Carolina The Tar Heel State :)

05 Apr 2012, 2:31 pm

It is I just like teasing Alexander

Alexender
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 2 Jan 2012
Age: 32
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,194
Location: wrongplanet

05 Apr 2012, 3:07 pm

Joker wrote:

It is I just like teasing Alexander

I don't like it

_________________
www.wrongplanet.net

ArrantPariah
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 30 Mar 2012
Age: 120
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,972

05 Apr 2012, 3:10 pm

Alexender wrote:

and it says another when has there been an obama attack on the 2nd amendment?

http://www.nrapublications.org/index.ph ... t-by-2016/

President Obama has attacked the second amendment in a very sinister way--by insidiously claiming to have strengthened gun rights, by restoring our right to transport firearms in luggage aboard Amtrak trains, and to possess firearms in national parks. That is an obvious diversion to distract us from his true intentions, which is to confiscate all weapons immediately upon re-election.

He is already going after people who sell surface-to-air missiles. If you want your own, then you had better stock up before this November. All patriots already are stocking up.

AstroGeek
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 28 Jan 2011
Age: 31
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,582

05 Apr 2012, 3:18 pm

CoMF wrote:

AstroGeek wrote:

I've never understood why a right to bear arms is so important. I guess I can understand someone wanting a hunting rifle or the like, but I really don't see why people need the right to own automatic weapons.

I don't see why people who live in metropolitan areas need to own a vehicle larger than a Smart or compact sedan, but you won't hear me clamoring for a ban or restriction on the ownership of big ugly trucks and SUVs.

I don't see why people need to dine out when it's cheaper to cook a healthy, nutritious meal at home, but you won't hear me advocating for a ban or restriction on lifestyle choices.

My point is, while I can criticize the choices of others, I don't find it fair or just to restrict those choices just because I have a pet peeve, nor do I try to justify my own conceits with righteous indignation. I'm not accusing you of such, but those two things are all too frequently what "you dont need [insert pet peeve here]" discussions almost always boil down to.

Banning SUVs in cities wouldn't be such a bad idea. It would cut down on a lot of pollution. But I'm not so much calling for an outright ban on gun ownership as asking why it needs to be a constitutional right. We don't have a constitutional right to drive Hummers. I guess I figure things in the constitution should be more fundamental, like freedom of speech, freedom of religion, etc.

Jacoby
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 10 Dec 2007
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 14,284
Location: Permanently banned by power tripping mods lol this forum is trash

05 Apr 2012, 3:55 pm

Our government must of been jealous of Viktor Bout. Only we have the right to give weapons to terrorists and dictators!

CoMF
Deinonychus

Joined: 7 Feb 2012
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 328

05 Apr 2012, 3:58 pm

AstroGeek wrote:

Banning SUVs in cities wouldn't be such a bad idea. It would cut down on a lot of pollution.

How much do they pollute in comparison to aircraft, commercial trucks and buses? The difference you'd see in hydrocarbon emissions would likely be insignifigant, at best.

AstroGeek wrote:

But I'm not so much calling for an outright ban on gun ownership as asking why it needs to be a constitutional right. We don't have a constitutional right to drive Hummers. I guess I figure things in the constitution should be more fundamental, like freedom of speech, freedom of religion, etc.

I know you weren't advocating an outright ban, as I'm familiar with your stance from other posts. The point I was trying to make was that when most people argue whether something is really "needed" and attempt to codify it into law, the "greater good" they frequently enjoy invoking is really nothing more than a euphemism for imposing their own personal conceits upon everyone else.

Speaking in the context of the American Constitution, our Bill of Rights was not envisioned as a "buffet" where we get to pick and choose only the items which we find "palatable" and shun or disregard the ones we don't. Rather, it was intended to be a "package deal" meant to be enjoyed in its entirety.

Also, while there isn't a "constitutional right to drive Hummers" to the best of my knowledge, I also believe that people have the right to make poor decisions just as you and I have the right to chide, ridicule, or ostracize them as circumstances warrant.

enso
Hummingbird

Joined: 14 Feb 2012
Age: 52
Gender: Male
Posts: 19
Location: woods of northern michigan

05 Apr 2012, 4:48 pm

I see nothing in this article that indicates a ban on anything. Gun trading is still perfectly legal and this guy appears to have gone way around the normal legal trading channels.

Quote:

Federal prosecutors say Bout should spend life in prison because he agreed "without hesitation and with frightening speed" to ship "a breathtaking arsenal of weapons," including hundreds of surface-to-air missiles, machine guns and sniper rifles along with 10 million rounds of ammunition to men he believed represented a foreign terrorist organization willing to kill Americans in Colombia.

Someone above posted asking why anyone would want to own a gun or an automatic weapon. I have no trouble with this but where I begin to wonder is when we begin talking about "surface to air missiles" I couls always hunt with an automatic weapon but what would be left if I go out looking deer hunting or defending my home with a surface to air missile. I see nothing wrong with the arrest and possible conviction of this guy given the nature of what he was doing. And should I remind everyone that most of our current gun laws came from the brady bill which was in fact inspired by the attempted shooting of a republican president. I do not see how any one president or their party belief matters in the slightest in this story. So I really fail to see how in any way this has anything to do with president obama in the least.

Alexender
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 2 Jan 2012
Age: 32
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,194
Location: wrongplanet

05 Apr 2012, 4:52 pm

Panda it isn't april fools anymore

_________________
www.wrongplanet.net

Jacoby
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 10 Dec 2007
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 14,284
Location: Permanently banned by power tripping mods lol this forum is trash

05 Apr 2012, 5:18 pm

What sentence should Eric Holder get for running guns to Mexican drug cartels?

abacacus
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 15 Apr 2007
Age: 32
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,380

05 Apr 2012, 5:32 pm

You have the right to own fire arms, not surface to air missiles.

What if he was selling a nuke to a terrorist group in the U.S.? Is that also covered under the second amendment?

He took it too far is all.

_________________
A shot gun blast into the face of deceit
You'll gain your just reward.
We'll not rest until the purge is complete
You will reap what you've sown.

Dox47
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 28 Jan 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,670
Location: Seattle-ish

05 Apr 2012, 5:43 pm

abacacus wrote:

It's all irrelevant anyway because we're not talking about a US citizen here and "arms" and "ordnance" are different categories under the law and all, but Pandabear has never let fact or reason get in the way of his trying to needle conservatives.

_________________
Your boos mean nothing, I've seen what makes you cheer.

- Rick Sanchez

blunnet
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 3 Apr 2011
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,053

05 Apr 2012, 6:00 pm

ArrantPariah is Pandabear?

AstroGeek
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 28 Jan 2011
Age: 31
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,582

05 Apr 2012, 6:06 pm

CoMF wrote:

AstroGeek wrote:

Banning SUVs in cities wouldn't be such a bad idea. It would cut down on a lot of pollution.

How much do they pollute in comparison to aircraft, commercial trucks and buses? The difference you'd see in hydrocarbon emissions would likely be insignifigant, at best.

Cars constitute a massive amount of our CO2 emissions. Putting in place requirements on fuel efficiency could go some way to mitigate that. (Isn't there some law like that in California? Anyway, that would be a much better approach than banning certain types of vehicles.) It also results in cleaner air in the city, which is better for people's health.

Don't get me started on other things like aircraft, trucks, and buses. My stances on them would not be well liked by any of the freedom-loving Americans on here. Let's just say I'd envision high speed rail in certain areas, and regulation of what modes of transit could be used where. I never said I'd be a popular person if I was in power. Or even one who does a particularly good job. Also, buses do emit less CO2 per passenger mile than cars, so I'm actually fine with them (for the time being).

ArrantPariah
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 30 Mar 2012
Age: 120
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,972

05 Apr 2012, 6:12 pm

Dox47 wrote:

Oh, so the Second Amendment only applies to Americans, does it? Imagine what Iraq would have been like if Iraqis hadn't been able to keep their weapons. They would have been reduced to killing each other with butter knives.

The Second Amendment knows no distinction between "arms" and "ordnance", and is among our most sacred rites.

Your liberalism is gushing out like Cytheria's ejaculant today.

Dox47
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 28 Jan 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,670
Location: Seattle-ish

05 Apr 2012, 6:21 pm

blunnet wrote:

ArrantPariah is Pandabear?

Well, unless there are multiple conservative-baiting, hysterically anti-smoking, sex thread spamming WPers out there who also can't occupy the same space at the same time...

Now why you would change your online identity only to come back and do the EXACT same things that drew people's ire before is the real mystery.

_________________
Your boos mean nothing, I've seen what makes you cheer.

- Rick Sanchez

Page 2 of 8 [ 114 posts ] Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 8 Next

Jump to:

Another Obama Attack on the Second Amendment! Post Reply New Topic

Another Obama Attack on the Second Amendment!