Obama urges gun control after Colorado Springs shooting: 'Enough is enough'

a reply to: EternalSolace


I was responding to a quote contained in stormbringer's post. It was not a quote from the constitution itself, 'nor was it intended to be an argument for gun control.

Patrick Henry, Speech to the Virginia Ratifying Convention, June 5, 1778

Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are ruined.... The great object is that every man be armed. Everyone who is able might have a gun."
- Patrick Henry, Speech to the Virginia Ratifying Convention, June 5, 1778

a reply to: Eilasvaleleyn

There are citizen militia groups. You don't hear much about them and when you do, the media paints them as a bunch of crazy whack job kooks who run around and play army in the back woods.

The government does not like the existence of such things. It is a threat to their power ... much like an armed citizenry is a threat to their power.

a reply to: HighFive

I'd prefer a system like the concealed carry card in Michigan. Once you've passed the federal check, you get a card. You can buy any gun without additional checks for a period of 5 years.

Again man, this is not true, even with a CHL you still have to pass the background check..

- St. George Tucker, Blackstone's Commentaries on the Laws of England, 1803

This may be considered as the true palladium of liberty.... The right of self defense is the first law of nature: in most governments it has been the study of rulers to confine this right within the narrowest limits possible. Wherever standing armies are kept up, and the right of the people to keep and bear arms is, under any color or pretext whatsoever, prohibited, liberty, if not already annihilated, is on the brink of destruction."
- St. George Tucker, Blackstone's Commentaries on the Laws of England, 1803

- Samuel Adams, Massachusetts Ratifying Convention, 1788

"The Constitution shall never be construed to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms."
- Samuel Adams, Massachusetts Ratifying Convention, 1788

a reply to: Eilasvaleleyn

I just find that when talking about this topic, being as accurate as possible is best. I didn't take your post to be one way of the other. My apologies if I came across as attacking you. I was just trying to elaborate a bit.

There actually are state recognized and organized militias. But there aren't that many of them.

- Tench Coxe, Philadelphia Federal Gazette, June 18, 1789

As civil rulers, not having their duty to the people before them, may attempt to tyrannize, and as the military forces which must be occasionally raised to defend our country, might pervert their power to the injury of their fellow citizens, the people are confirmed by the article in their right to keep and bear their private arms."

It is absolute madness to trust the object of that precaution with the power to remove that precaution.

a reply to: wildb

Yes. To get a CPL in MI, you pass a federal background check. Pass the gun safety class.
Once you obtain a CPL you no longer have to go to your local police dept. to get a permit to purchase a pistol.
When someone goes to get the permit the police dept. does a background check.

I recently purchased a Ruger SR9 through a private sale. All I had to do was fill out the RI 060 Michigan Pistol Sales Record. No background check. But yes, when I obtained my CPL I passed the check 3 years ago

a reply to: HighFive

Once you obtain a CPL you no longer have to go to your local police dept. to get a permit to purchase a pistol.

This part is true, however if you go to a gun store you still have to pass the NICS's check right there on the spot..

oh the hypocrisy condemning the murder of adults in a clinic but not condemning the murder of innocent babies in the same clinic. Don't get me wrong, what the guy did was wrong, a crime & murder and should be tried as such, this battle for abortion needs to be fought in the courts and peaceful protests a lotted to us by our constitution and not by violence. This is just another attempt by Obama to steal our freedoms, violate and degrade the second amendment and establish a more tyrannical government.

a reply to: wildb

Correct if you purchase from a FFL you must always pass the background check.

Two thoughts I have based on some issues raised here - and elsewhere:

1. While calling the problem a "Mental Health" issue - not a weapon issue - may seem like common sense to many...how do you effectively seeing that work?

By definition, you are putting the power of gun ownership in doctors hands. Further to that, how would needing to get an approval from a mental health professional any different from needing any other form of "permit"?

Declaring a shooter "Mentally Unfit" AFTER the fact is completely useless.

2. How is a Mass Shooter any different from a Terrorist? What is the material difference? Both take control of an area and kill indiscriminately. If a member of your family is killed in a restaurant or clinic, do you really care whether the bullets came from a "mass shooter" or a "Jihadist" or other brand of "Terrorist"? Dead is dead.

originally posted by: strongfp
a reply to: Sublimecraft

Where has Obama ever said he wants to take away guns from people?
He is for stricter gun control on how easy it is to obtain a weapon, not taking away weapons.
When you have a nation where it's easier to get a gun than a drivers license something is wrong.

Thing is, he wants to take away the guns but he knows it's an impossible dream of his. If he could, he would but many democrats won't even support that, so he's going after the next best thing, making it difficult to get a gun or make use of the one you already have by outlawing ammunition.

We don't collectively punish? Go to the middle east who've lost something like 4 million people on account of a few mental cases/extremists.

As well as the majority of America that wants to deny refugees for the acts of 1.

TAKE THE GUNS. Less accessibility, less mass shootings.

a reply to: Sublimecraft

platforms with his predictable diatribe that "gimme ya guns"

I missed the part where he said that. If you want the mentally and emotionally unstable to continue to be able to purchase guns and walk in anywhere there's a good hunting ground to open fire, then you keep this up. Also keep putting words in the President's mouth. "Gun Control" doesn't mean "GIMME YA GUNS", except in your mind, and your groupies, apparently -- but you just keep on pretending like it does. Maybe it will get ya some stars. Not that you need anymore flaunting this kind of nonsense.

You don't have psychotics killing children in your country like we do. I hope you never do. But we DO. And like the President says, we've got to do something about it. You want one to walk into your child's school? Well, give them all guns and then....... wait.

People, you've been told a hundred times, and yet you continue to believe it.

GUN CONTROL DOES NOT MEAN TAKING YOUR GUNS. It's about preventing those who would do us harm from getting them, if at all possible.

Stop being sucked into this hype.

originally posted by: SuspiciousTom
We don't collectively punish? Go to the middle east who've lost something like 4 million people on account of a few mental cases/extremists.

As well as the majority of America that wants to deny refugees for the acts of 1.

TAKE THE GUNS. Less accessibility, less mass shootings.

Aint no 4 million people. try less than 500,000 total between the US and terrorist.

originally posted by: rossacus
a reply to: stormbringer1701
Nothing to do with the documents or history, it is simply the mentality. Justifying the need for something simply based on documents centuries old is the same type of perspective many christians have.

Legally in the UK you still have to practice archery on Sundays but we don't, tines change.

Please leave strawman type arguements out. It helps amplify the smugness.

Times change but as long as the US exist its founding document will as well. See we dont trust our government liek the europeans do. because all you have ever known is the devil you know.

If you want to dismiss laws based on old documents welcome back to th e king and queen ruling over you. welcome back to servitude.

originally posted by: yuppa

If you want to dismiss laws based on old documents welcome back to th e king and queen ruling over you. welcome back to servitude.

Unfortunately we have been served up the king and queen roles in a different flavor here in the USA.

A cow provides much more milk and appears happier when it grazes in an open pasture.

originally posted by: yuppa

originally posted by: SuspiciousTom
We don't collectively punish? Go to the middle east who've lost something like 4 million people on account of a few mental cases/extremists.

As well as the majority of America that wants to deny refugees for the acts of 1.

TAKE THE GUNS. Less accessibility, less mass shootings.

Aint no 4 million people. try less than 500,000 total between the US and terrorist.

It's an over-exaggerated number, at the end of the day the whole nation suffered for the doings of a few extremists/mental cases. This is no different.