Pump-action shotguns -- how long before a ban?

Most people that kill, murder and commit most crime have long criminal records of petty crimes and would never pass a background check and are prohibited from owning firearms anyway.
Even certain misdemeanor arrests and habitual use of drugs etc..

 

And a mighty big pile of nonsense, at that!

 

Not at all. You stated unequivocally you would comply with the law regardless of how totalitarian it was. Compliance equals approval which equates to complicity.

The British laughed in the face of a bunch of upstart farmers defying the King too. Who laughed last there? Sometimes rebellions are based in valid reasons, and some fail and some succeed.

IF you could muster up a supermajority of the American people sufficient to amend the Constitution to repeal the 2nd, then the Republic is truly dead and I will have no further part in it. There are certain things that are my proverbial line in the sand; things I would rather die fighting against than accept it being inflicted upon me against my will.

There are some things I find worth fighting and dying for. How about you?

"Those who refuse to remember history are doomed to repeat it." Acquiescence to tyranny is cowardice not matter what century it occurs in.

I'd do a Hell of a lot more than just "vote against it." What about you?

 

That may be your opinion, but it's not mine.

Looks like the south failed in their bid.

You may choose to move to Mexico where they have plenty of guns to go around; if you would rather die fighting, you might get your wish. Funeral directors just love people with your mindset.

Yes there is.

violence breeds violence.

Nope, voting is the mechanism used to decide how to live and under what conditions. I'm okay with it.

 

Then your ok with living with the 2A.

 

Your "opinion" is fallacy. If you comply with a law then you are complicit in it. If the law is to truck people off to be murdered and you say, "So be it; it's the law" then your hands have as much blood on them as the troops that pull the triggers.

Sure. And the Founders won in theirs; creating the nation whose ideals you clearly hold in contempt.

I never said anything about moving anywhere. I have rights, and I will fight to defend them by whatever means I feel are necessary.

Apparently, it's fighting to defend your government; not matter how immoral, brutal, or totalitarian it becomes.

As well it should. If someone comes at me with the intention of violence, then they will beget more violence than they could possibly stomach or likely survive.

If you stand idly by while people are loaded into trucks to be murdered, only to shrug and say, "Well, I voted against this but it's the law" then the blood of those slain is on you. Ever notice how violent dictators keep getting "reelected" by 95% of the vote?? That's because the real votes mean nothing to them. Sooner or later moral and ethical people have to stand up and say "No"; with force if necessary.

 

yes; as long as it remains on the books, I'll go by what the law says.

 

That may be your position, however its not mine.

There you go again, running your mouth without the facts since you don't personally know me.

So be it.

So do you consider yourself a violent person?

We already have a dictator in office in Washington, DC; how much worse can it get?

 

drama much?

 

Not really; keep throwing it at me and I'll do the same at you. You are not going to convince me that your viewpoint is the correct one nor do I expect you to agree with mine; its sort of a stalemate at this point and I'm close to ending debate on this thread with you.

 

the difference is, I am not posting nonsensical silliness that is based on ignorance of the subject. You are posting nonsense like claiming honest citizens should be limited to obsolete firearms in the face of criminals who have state of the art weapons. This is either due to a strange fear of firearms or more likely, a political agenda that is based on a loathing of the voting patterns of avid gun owners. I suspect the latter-you don't like the way the NRA votes and the politicians it supports

 

Gun deaths per capita in California are quite low. DC is too small to judge independently

 

Well I happen to disagree with your viewpoint. And that ends any further discussion between you and I on this thread. Merry Christmas!

 

Your own words tell me all about you I need to know.

I believe there are times when violence is not only appropriate, but under some circumstances the only moral and ethical course of action. Some people act like any kind of violence is reprehensible or undesirable, and it is these people who have contributed to the undermining of the health of our civilization. There ARE times when righteous violence is justifiable and necessary when societal predators seek to brutalize the innocent.

Oh, please. You can spare me that nonsense. I don't like Trump much, but he's at least shown more respect for the Constitution than his predecessor ever did.

 

Who is the Dictator now ?

And your slander against the President is noted.
Homeland security has been notified.

 

Duplicate post

 

It is not against the law to call the president a dictator.

 

Your a good little American!

 

conservatives only believe in the 2nd amendment; all else is secondary. They only protect the 1st amendment when it suits their agenda.

 

Well, I don't consider myself a "conservative", and it might surprise you that I agree there are some gun rights advocates who are too myopically focused on the protection of the one right to the exclusion of others, or even to the suppression of others.

I would never seek to constrain your right to speak as you wish and to express your opinions. But, that belief extends beyond the First Amendment alone. Let me clarify: unless I am mistaken you have stated that if ever the Constitution should be amended to eliminate the Bill of Rights you would comply with that; even to the extent of standing by and watching people being rounded up and herded off to camps for "reeducation". Here's the difference between you and I, as I see it: if the state ever eliminated the Bill of Rights, including the First Amendment protections of Free Speech, I would not stand idly by and accept that. For instance: I believe you should be able to speak as you wish, and I also have the right to stand up and condemn your views, as expressed, in the strongest terms. BUT... if you were the one who was about to be dragged into a truck simply for expressing your opinions I would put myself between you and those who would strip you of your life and liberty and I would fight for you and your rights.

 

First off, I think your analogy of rounding up people and shipping them off to re-education camps is about as extreme as you can get and in my wildest dreams I can never see the American people support a constitutional change in regards to that.

That being said, if the constitution is changed, not just for the 2nd amendment but any part of it, I would comply because that's the mechanism we use to govern ourselves. The same goes for laws; I don't believe that I should pay income tax, however the law say's that I have to so I comply.

And yes, in an extreme example, if you were being dragged off onto a truck for expressing your opinions, I'd do whatever I could to prevent; in fact I think many Americans would do the same thing.

 

Even if the united states constitution was amended in a fashion that made the expression of such opinions a punishable offense that justified such a course of treatment?

 

I would oppose amending the constitution in that case; would you?

 

If it were so amended, you'd support that law though, right? It's the law.