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

Sublime really great diatribe about our Potus. If I could give you a 100 stars I would. Some basic math, 330 million American citizens of which 7 of 10 own more than one firearm. That is a whole damn heap of firepower. If our Government thinks they can confiscate all those firearms then they have lost their collective minds!!

Of those 7 of 10 that own firearms there's a % of them that have never registered said firearm. When our Gov decides to go round up all them firearms , they better damn sure have a big dept or agency to do it. Because friends and fellow countrymen, that's when the 2nd Amendment will be used....by all who defend it. Id rather fight to keep my 2nd Amendment rights than cower away in a corner while my nations Constitution is shredded before my eyes.

originally posted by: projectvxn
a reply to: Eilasvaleleyn

I took an oath to protect and defend the Constitution. Not just the second amendment.

But the Second Amendment is the teeth and claws of liberty. Without it our corrupt ass government would enslave us.

They already have to some degree.

Our nation literally has hundreds of millions of guns and no matter what the left would like to happen, nothing will change that.

a reply to: Eilasvaleleyn

Clearly, you do not uderstand...... it's OK. Few do get the meaning behind the speech. Your feelings are not my directive. Thanks tho...I'm sure your reference is the 'Huacaya' eh?

a reply to: MagesticEsoteric

Well that's another thing, I don't have bears. I have hedgehogs. A loud bang is enough to scare them off.

I appreciate your taking the time to explain this to me, it's very personal to different people but the general view is it's nobody's business what you have and it should be your decision. I think I'm getting it.

originally posted by: Eilasvaleleyn

originally posted by: projectvxn
a reply to: HighFive

Why is it legitimate to violate the 4th Amendment in order to exercise the 2nd? Does that not offend the very notion of Constitutionalism?

Why is it that we are willing to allow this?

Yes, yes, PLEASE, all you Americans who defend the second amendment should be going NUTS about how much your fourth one is being violated. You should be supporting the whole constitution, but people seem to pick and choose.
The reason why the 2nd has so much more support than the 4th is because someone can't profit from 4th being enforced. ^_^

It's because most don't understand their constitutional rights or what it even means to be free.

By the time the guns are gone they wouldn't even know what hit them. Because long before that happens freedom of speech will be long gone also. I suspect most will stare blankly like a deer in headlights.

a reply to: ReadLeader

No, I do understand, but sheepdog corral sheep. They herd them.

originally posted by: openyourmind1262
Sublime really great diatribe about our Potus. If I could give you a 100 stars I would. Some basic math, 330 million American citizens of which 7 of 10 own more than one firearm. That is a whole damn heap of firepower. If our Government thinks they can confiscate all those firearms then they have lost their collective minds!!

Of those 7 of 10 that own firearms there's a % of them that have never registered said firearm. When our Gov decides to go round up all them firearms , they better damn sure have a big dept or agency to do it. Because friends and fellow countrymen, that's when the 2nd Amendment will be used....by all who defend it. Id rather fight to keep my 2nd Amendment rights than cower away in a corner while my nations Constitution is shredded before my eyes.

And varmint hunters will lead the way, if ya know what I mean..

originally posted by: projectvxn
a reply to: HighFive

I'm sorry UBC's would not require a national gun registry(which I would oppose), just a BC by a licensed dealer

You mean the NICS check we already have?

Let me ask you a question:

Why is it legitimate to violate the 4th Amendment in order to exercise the 2nd? Does that not offend the very notion of Constitutionalism?

Why is it that we are willing to allow this?

That is another topic entirely. We already have background checks. We already limit the types of weapons we can own. We already prohibit certain people from obtaining guns. Constitutional violations? Courts say no, but that is a valid argument.

So really aren't we just talking about where to draw the line?
Does an attempted murderer, fresh outta prison still have a constitutional right to bear arms, that shall not be infringed?

a reply to: projectvxn

Right, but please throw as much support behind the 4th amendment as you can. I can understand the 2nd, I can understand why you love it so much, I just wish we lived in a world where it wasn't necessary.

originally posted by: openyourmind1262
Id rather fight to keep my 2nd Amendment rights than cower away in a corner while my nations Constitution is shredded before my eyes.

So... The fourth amendment means... What? Cheetos?

Sundown at Coffin Rock, good read and on topic..

www.firearmsandliberty.com...

a reply to: beansidhe

Do you not think it would be a good idea to limit guns to folk OR are you thinking that you don't trust the one's doing the limiting? In other words you don't trust them not to say this group can't have them or that man can't because (insert made up reason)?

The Constitution is the Supreme Law of the Land.

It does not, however grant rights. The Constitution assumes, in its language, that the rights are inherent in the people themselves. So the Constitution restricts GOVERNMENT from taking any such action.

"Shall not be infringed" "Congress shall make no law" "No person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property"...

I can go on, but the language is clear. In every instance where a right is protected it is not the aim of the Constitution to grant it but to restrict government from abrogating them.

Basically, the government has no rights. The government has powers and they are clearly enumerated in the Constitution. The government has NO POWER, RIGHT, OR AUTHORITY to restrict the right to arms or any other right protected by the Constitution.

"How strangely will the Tools of a Tyrant pervert the plain Meaning of Words!"
-Samuel Adams

originally posted by: Eilasvaleleyn
a reply to: projectvxn

Right, but please throw as much support behind the 4th amendment as you can. I can understand the 2nd, I can understand why you love it so much, I just wish we lived in a world where it wasn't necessary.

I can promise you no place on Earth exists.

Even the relative calm of some countries is just an illusion.

War tends to change your perspective on "human relations" once you've been a part of it.

a reply to: HighFive

We already limit the types of weapons we can own.

Really, please explain, short of owning a tank, wait we can have that too..

a reply to: projectvxn

It just really pisses me off when people would defend their second amendment to the death (literally) but don't seem to care as much about the fourth. It gives me the notion that people just care more about the guns than the actual constitution, and the constitution is just used as a way to justify their love of guns.

Like when people selectively take stuff from religious texts. You know what I mean?

a reply to: Eilasvaleleyn

Elias, are you just trolling around for discussion / confict? You seem as though you are still somewhat green....


""I am actually quite young, so I am perhaps more easily influenced than those with more worldly experience, but in turn I am also substantially less biased (or at least believe myself to be.) """

BTW, no you do not understand... more reading and less posting would do you well for now young lad...



ETA. Yes I did misuse a prepositional phrase....

originally posted by: Eilasvaleleyn
a reply to: projectvxn

It just really pisses me off when people would defend their second amendment to the death (literally) but don't seem to care as much about the fourth. It gives me the notion that people just care more about the guns than the actual constitution, and the constitution is just used as a way to justify their love of guns.

Like when people selectively take stuff from religious texts. You know what I mean?

Would you see it fair to declaw a tiger before releasing it back into the wild?

That's why people fight for the second so strongly.

originally posted by: beansidhe
a reply to: MagesticEsoteric

Well that's another thing, I don't have bears. I have hedgehogs. A loud bang is enough to scare them off.

I appreciate your taking the time to explain this to me, it's very personal to different people but the general view is it's nobody's business what you have and it should be your decision. I think I'm getting it.

I seriously applaud you! I very rarely step into the gun rights threads around here.

You just jumped in and held your own.

I'm only giving you my perspective and believe me when I say...it differs all around the US.

You nailed it perfectly when you said it's personal because it really is...to each his/her own.

But, we all rally together when our rights are being threatened . Our rights are just that....our rights under the constitution.

That's the american way that I love and remember.

originally posted by: Eilasvaleleyn
a reply to: projectvxn

It just really pisses me off when people would defend their second amendment to the death (literally) but don't seem to care as much about the fourth. It gives me the notion that people just care more about the guns than the actual constitution, and the constitution is just used as a way to justify their love of guns.

Like when people selectively take stuff from religious texts. You know what I mean?

The forth is history, much of it is, thats why the 2A is so important right now.