__________________
The left lost the ability, use logic or know what truth is with the embrace of moral relativism. Thus you get moral equivalence between acts like detaining terrorists and cutting off heads of innocents.
If lawmakers and anti-gun groups were serious about reducing or ending gun crimes, they would turn their wrath toward the criminals. As it is, their efforts are not the solution to gun crimes they are part of the problem.
Even if you gave liberals the answers on an ethics exam, they’d fail.

If those guns were not dangerous none of us would want one. I want the most deadly, dangerous gun I can pack to hurt and kill those who would kill me. A quote attributed to a Texas Ranger went in a story something like this: "lady notices cocked and locked .45 on his hip and asked if that wasn't dangerous" Texas Ranger replied, "of course it is dangerous or I wouldn't pack the darn thing"!

You still trying the old ploy that once worked of trying to intimidate people and make them fearful of a Constitutional right by demonizing an inantimate object? How is that gun control working out in jolly old England old chap? eh?

Would you stop putting your specific propaganda on advanced communication devices? The power of the press is indeed more to be feared than guns in the rightful hands of the owners of this Republic.

To prohibit a citizen from wearing or carrying a war arm . . . is an unwarranted restriction upon the constitutional right to keep and bear arms. If cowardly and dishonorable men sometimes shoot unarmed men with army pistols or guns, the evil must be prevented by the penitentiary and gallows, and not by a general deprivation of constitutional privilege. [Wilson v. State, 33 Ark. 557, at 560, 34 Am. Rep. 52, at 54 (1878)]

Hi PerterV. So far I have been staying out of this waiting for you to clarify your position. The problem is that you are making blanket statements. Others are trying to feel you out and giving you a chance to clarify your position.

There are currently 20 to 30 thousand gun laws already on the books. The “Unregulated” Gun and we have all of these Federal gun laws that have been passed.

1.Brady background checks for all handgun buyers,
2.institution of the waiting period,
3. Making it illegal for anyone under 18 to own or even possess a handgun.
4. The President's executive order stopping the importation of many guns,
5. Excessive fees and regulations that drove many legitimate gun shop owners out of business.
6. The widening of Brady to include background checks from just handguns to include all new firearm purchases.
7. Insta Check!
8. Additional disqualification's and changes to legal firearms purchases on form 4473,
9. The assault weapons ban. Sunset
10. The ten round magazine, Sunset
11 Lautenburg.
12. and just recently the NICS improvement act!

Is this enough? Or are you asking more from a Right that our founders sought to protect from Governments intrusion and interference, by Constitutionally protecting it?

__________________
"Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel." -- Patrick Henry

Yeah well guess what, I don't give a damn. Just because something's dangerous, that doesn't mean the government should have the authority to regulate it in whatever manner they choose to. When the wishes of the people conflict with the desires of the government, the only proper outcome is for the government to withdraw and suck it up.

__________________
Taking away rights to stop criminals is like taking away chocolate chip cookies to stop cancer; it sounds good on paper, but doesn't work in the real world.

[QUOTE=Brady;363469]When I was a kid I did lots of things like playing with fire and torturing animals even though adults told me not to.[/QUOTE]
The admission of a sociopathic serial killer.

[QUOTE=Penfold;363126]No Personal attacks, insults, name calling, offensive generalizations, or labeling.[/QUOTE]
He should practice what he preaches.

And PeterV thinks presses are safe?
ExecutedToday.com 1692: Giles Corey, “more weight!”

The OP attempts to conflate "early America" with "times of military mergency" in order to justify the conclusion you make above.


The qualifier "at moments of military emergency" is glossed over
In Anglo-American law, the state may exercise extraordinary powers and even abridge basic civil liberties like the right to a trial, at moments of military emergency. The practice of impressment [confiscation of private property for public use] is, like the suspension of the writ of habeas corpus, an application of the state's military power.... Of ten states that practiced the impressment of arms during the Revolution, eight appear to have permanently discontinued the practice by 1787.


What happened when the military emergency passed in early america? The extraordinary powers were discontinued. That hardly supports claims made by those supporting gun control.

I thought my post was clear that it happened in times of military emergency and even included information about the impressment of arms being largely discontinued after the war.

__________________
"I'm becoming more and more convinced that anyone with a visible passion for the Constitution is actually a fraud merely trying to hide behind what he or she considers to be a rhetorically impenetrable shield. After all, if you keep disagreeing with them after they've invoked the Constitution, they can simply dismiss you as unamerican."

"The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts."
-Bertrand Russell

FYI, Michael Bellesiles has been completely and utterly discredited to the point where proponents of gun control (never sticklers for facts) have stopped bringing him up.

I wasn't even talking about taking people's guns away and Nato556, FYI, gov't is of by and for the people. So the gov't will only pass gun laws people want. Get your facts straight before posting

__________________
The left lost the ability, use logic or know what truth is with the embrace of moral relativism. Thus you get moral equivalence between acts like detaining terrorists and cutting off heads of innocents.
If lawmakers and anti-gun groups were serious about reducing or ending gun crimes, they would turn their wrath toward the criminals. As it is, their efforts are not the solution to gun crimes they are part of the problem.
Even if you gave liberals the answers on an ethics exam, they’d fail.

So that may be true in a democracy of mob rule but it would not be the case in this Constitutional Republic!

Doc, can you elaborate on this point? Not everyone understands the significances of what you just said.

__________________
"Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel." -- Patrick Henry

Government will only pass the gun laws people want? Come on man how old are you, really? Nobody can be that foolish.

The government doesn't care what the people want, they pass the laws that only they want. California passed the gun microstamping and ammo regulation bills despite the extreme opposition they faced. New Jersey became a gun rationing state despite months of intense opposition. The federal government failed to enact the national carry reciprocity bill despite it's 38 state support.

And that's only in the last couple of years. Do I have to make a detailed list of all the bad laws that got passed despite the millions of calls to the contrary?

__________________
Taking away rights to stop criminals is like taking away chocolate chip cookies to stop cancer; it sounds good on paper, but doesn't work in the real world.

[QUOTE=Brady;363469]When I was a kid I did lots of things like playing with fire and torturing animals even though adults told me not to.[/QUOTE]
The admission of a sociopathic serial killer.

[QUOTE=Penfold;363126]No Personal attacks, insults, name calling, offensive generalizations, or labeling.[/QUOTE]
He should practice what he preaches.

Michael A. Bellesiles: Information from Answers.com

__________________
Taking away rights to stop criminals is like taking away chocolate chip cookies to stop cancer; it sounds good on paper, but doesn't work in the real world.

[QUOTE=Brady;363469]When I was a kid I did lots of things like playing with fire and torturing animals even though adults told me not to.[/QUOTE]
The admission of a sociopathic serial killer.

[QUOTE=Penfold;363126]No Personal attacks, insults, name calling, offensive generalizations, or labeling.[/QUOTE]
He should practice what he preaches.