Who is the bigger fascist? Trump or Democrats?

originally posted by: TinySickTears

originally posted by: neo96

originally posted by: TinySickTears
a reply to: neo96

You keep using the term inalienable like you really really want it to be true when it's not.

That right was given to us by men.

So our RIGHTS come from each other?

Is that what your saying?

Because they don't.

Some do. Yes
Some, like the right to bear arms was given to us by other men.
Are you saying that's not true?

No it GD wasn't.

They put ink to pen to preserve that OTHER men not take it.

a reply to: neo96

Your own link talks about all the times it's been argued in court.
Can you answer my questions now

Neither of them are fascists.

Banning assault weapons is not a fascist policy.


And if banning assault weapons will result in the US government installing a tyranny, tell me, however did the US government manage to not install a tyranny before assault weapons were for sale?

a reply to: swanne

If Mussolini were gay he'd totally be a bear.

originally posted by: neo96

originally posted by: TinySickTears

originally posted by: neo96

originally posted by: TinySickTears
a reply to: neo96

You keep using the term inalienable like you really really want it to be true when it's not.

That right was given to us by men.

So our RIGHTS come from each other?

Is that what your saying?

Because they don't.

Some do. Yes
Some, like the right to bear arms was given to us by other men.
Are you saying that's not true?

No it GD wasn't.

They put ink to pen to preserve that OTHER men not take it.

Yes it was.
It is not an inalienable right no matter how many times you say otherwise.

It was given to us by men no matter how many times you say otherwise.
I explained it to you in the other thread but you didn't get it then either

Oops, sorry, I thought the topic was about fascism but it would seem it is about guns again.

I'll therefore say the comment that the OP would like to hear.

YES! OP, you are absolutely right! When the guys wrote the constitution several hundred years ago, they TOTALLY meant that you had the right to bear automatic rifles with armor piercing bullets and uranium depleted projectiles; hell, they also meant that you could bear a rocket launcher, and several intercontinental missiles and a nuclear bomb or two.

Yay!

And,

YES! You're absolutely right, banning a specific type of weapon ABSOLUTELY means that you don't have the right to bear any firearms at all anymore, oh my gosh, the fascism! The horror! The emotional pains!

a reply to: neo96


Who abuses/wants to change the Constitution and Bill of Rights?

Leftists.

Anti-freedom, anti-Constitution dirtbags.

Trump might be the least fascist president ever, in actions. Anytime the courts say no, even if the courts are making a purely political ruling(I am looking at you 9th) he accepts the ruling. And moves within the laws for his next step.

You know he wants to give the dreamers amnesty but he knows the presidency doesn’t have the power

a reply to: TinySickTears

It is not an inalienable right no matter how many times you say otherwise.

Yes it is.

Read the Declaration of Independence.

Or just feel free to continue ignoring American history.

a reply to: swanne

I don't see how banning certain guns means people can't own guns anymore.
Makes no sense to me.

Things can, do, and should change to keep up with the world we live in.

We live in a completely different society than back then. Millions more people. Tons of other cultures. Far different weapons than those days and far fewer militias.

a reply to: DBCowboy

"I like taking the guns early..." - Donald Trump (R)
"Take the guns first, go through due process second" - Donald Trump (R)

a reply to: neo96

I'm not the one having a problem
Thanks for not answering my questions. That figures

originally posted by: crtrvt
a reply to: DBCowboy

"I like taking the guns early..." - Donald Trump (R)
"Take the guns first, go through due process second" - Donald Trump (R)

Sounds like a pillar of freedom.

Inalienable RIGHT.

Look it up.

Natural and legal rights are two types of rights. Natural rights are those that are not dependent on the laws or customs of any particular culture or government, and so are universal and inalienable (they cannot be repealed or restrained by human laws). Legal rights are those bestowed onto a person by a given legal system (they can be modified, repealed, and restrained by human laws).

en.wikipedia.org...

This is why the founding fathers wrote that number two.

To limit the state from taking it from the PEOPLE.

a reply to: DBCowboy

Since Trump is okay with circumventing due process when it comes to taking guns away from people, does that mean we have to lump him with leftists now?

originally posted by: TinySickTears
a reply to: neo96

Except it is interpreted all the time in law. Just cause you want it to be a certain way does not mean it is.

And it does not specify. So for the sake of this thread if semi autos were banned and could not be had you still have plenty you can get your hands on so you still can have guns and be in the militia and defend yourself.

So again. How is banning some stopping you from bearing arms?
Fact is it does not say any and all.

Do you think a person should be able to own any and all types of arms?

Its to protect from enemies foreign and domestic. If the enemies all have it then we need it to.

How do we protect ourselves if they ban guns and Trump decided to round up all black and brown people and put them in camps?

See what I am saying? hitler took all the guns right before trying to exterminate the Jews.

originally posted by: crtrvt
a reply to: DBCowboy

"I like taking the guns early..." - Donald Trump (R)
"Take the guns first, go through due process second" - Donald Trump (R)

*shrug*

Taken out of context.

But go ahead.

Refute the claim that so many on the left want top rewrite the Bill of Rights and Constitution.

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: DBCowboy

Since Trump is okay with circumventing due process when it comes to taking guns away from people, does that mean we have to lump him with leftists now?

Yes . he is at least in the middle .

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: DBCowboy

Since Trump is okay with circumventing due process when it comes to taking guns away from people, does that mean we have to lump him with leftists now?

Is that policy now?

I've been busy, might have missed it.

originally posted by: TinySickTears
a reply to: swanne

I don't see how banning certain guns means people can't own guns anymore.
Makes no sense to me.

Things can, do, and should change to keep up with the world we live in.

We live in a completely different society than back then. Millions more people. Tons of other cultures. Far different weapons than those days and far fewer militias.

No! You must refrain from using the voice of reason!

Don't you see? They won't be able to have an assault firearm anymore! They are in such pain! Forget the homeless that freeze in the streets in the middle of winter, forget the children that are starving in the world - this is much more serious! Americans won't be allowed to own an assault gun!

Oh my gosh what sufferings!