(08-12-2019 11:15 AM)GoodOwl Wrote:  

(08-11-2019 04:32 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  

(08-11-2019 04:17 PM)king king Wrote:  "a constitutionally agreeable way" to make gun owners earn the right to bear arms -

This can't possibly be constitutionally agreeable.

The article notes that the right to protect ourselves is given to us by our creator and that the constitution restricts the government's ability to infringe upon that right. Having to EARN a right is the antithesis of a right.

Unless we're going to require a 100 IQ or college degree to earn the right to vote?

I'm not saying there aren't some who would accept such a requirement... but it wouldn't pass Constitutional review.

You silly Democrat, don't you know no one believes in a creator? The Government created itself out of nothing--everyone knows that scientifically!

Personally I wouldn't mind if there was compulsive military service. It would teach a lot of whiny kids how to grow the hell up.

I put the above "constitutionally agreeable way" in quotes for a reason.

I disagree with the guy on the basic grounds that you don't have to earn a right (per se...one could argue you have to participate lawfully to be able to enjoy your rights but that's semantics).

Lost in all this debate about gun control is the often used "You have to compromise"

Gun owners have compromised enough.

National Firearms Act of 1934
Federal Firearms Act of 1938
Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets act of 1968
Gun Control Act of 1968
The hilariously named Firearm Owners Protection Act of 1986
Undetectable Firearms Act of 1988
Gun-Free Schools Act of 1990
Brady Handgun Violence Protection Act of 1993
Federal Assault Weapons Ban of 1996

Each and every time it was gun owners who "compromised" our rights in the false pursuit of "safety" and we've received absolutely nothing....not a repeal of a law that wasn't working, not a guaranteed confirmation of our right to keep and bear arms, not an easing of restrictions....absolutely nothing. That's not a "compromise", that's a surrender. It's high time we stop surrendering until the hoplophobes who want to strip us of our rights and the faux "gun rights supporters" who want to hand away our right while claiming to be Second Amendment supporters learn just exactly what the word compromise really means.

No to universal background checks because it's an unenforceable law and would require a national gun registry.

No to a national gun registry or a national gun license because it's the first step to confiscation and a tax on people who want to exercise their fundamental right to bear arms.

The only way I'm in favor of red flag laws is if there are accompanying mandatory harsh penalties for anyone who abuses the law in any way whatsoever, and if there's numerous levels of due process afforded the gun owner BEFORE their rights are taken away.

In return for supporting the Red Flag laws I want national reciprocity for concealed weapons permits, and federally mandate that the United States is a "shall issue" country when it comes to CCW permits.

(08-12-2019 03:25 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  Lost in all this debate about gun control is the often used "You have to compromise"

Gun owners have compromised enough.

National Firearms Act of 1934
Federal Firearms Act of 1938
Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets act of 1968
Gun Control Act of 1968
The hilariously named Firearm Owners Protection Act of 1986
Undetectable Firearms Act of 1988
Gun-Free Schools Act of 1990
Brady Handgun Violence Protection Act of 1993
Federal Assault Weapons Ban of 1996

Each and every time it was gun owners who "compromised" our rights in the false pursuit of "safety" and we've received absolutely nothing....not a repeal of a law that wasn't working, not a guaranteed confirmation of our right to keep and bear arms, not an easing of restrictions....absolutely nothing. That's not a "compromise", that's a surrender. It's high time we stop surrendering until the hoplophobes who want to strip us of our rights and the faux "gun rights supporters" who want to hand away our right while claiming to be Second Amendment supporters learn just exactly what the word compromise really means.

No to universal background checks because it's an unenforceable law and would require a national gun registry.

No to a national gun registry or a national gun license because it's the first step to confiscation and a tax on people who want to exercise their fundamental right to bear arms.

The only way I'm in favor of red flag laws is if there are accompanying mandatory harsh penalties for anyone who abuses the law in any way whatsoever, and if there's numerous levels of due process afforded the gun owner BEFORE their rights are taken away.

In return for supporting the Red Flag laws I want national reciprocity for concealed weapons permits, and federally mandate that the United States is a "shall issue" country when it comes to CCW permits.

Bravo! +3