deljzc said:I don't interpret the term "arms" in the constitution to mean any/all weapon in the equivalent caliber and capabilities as the government.
I didn't watch the speech, but I saw the crocodile tears. What a ******* PHONY.
Nope, and I'm not the one saying Obama is "a PHONY" or calling his emotions "crocodile tears."So Tibs, you can determine which tears are real, and those that are crocodile tears, correct? Who's on stage, and who's moved by raw emotions?
I'm not the one saying Obama is "a PHONY" or calling his emotions "crocodile tears."
Your freedom lasts - and goes only as far - as long as you're not infringing on someone else's freedoms and rights. If only you libs were able to see that this must work both ways. The constitution is not an empty check to allow everyone the right to do anything they wish. Regardless of how badly some want to interpret the 2nd amendment in that manner.
You seem to have confused the Constitution as a document that restricts the activities of people when in reality it is a document written and designed to restrict the actions of government. The Constitution is EXACTLY an "empty check" that allows people (the states) to do as they please with anything NOT specifically mentioned in it. I have never ( and no currently legal gun owner has ever) infringed on anyone's rights. But you evidently think your rights are more somehow more qualified or more deserving of protection than mine. Why?
Wow, hell is about to freeze over. I actually agree with Bill O'Reilly on this.
<iframe class="video-embed" src="https://mediamatters.org/embed/207784" width="480" height="360" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen scrolling="no"></iframe>
http://www.loc.gov/law/help/firearms-control/singapore.php
Why do gun laws work in other countries? For instance Singapore and South Korea have near zero gun deaths per year.
In Singapore if you have a gun illegally you face imprisonment and caning. If you commit a crime with a gun you get the death
penalty. Pretty simple and pretty effective.
In South Korea you can own a gun for hunting, but you have to store it at the local police station.
Seems to me if 30K plus Americans are dying unnecessarily by gunshot each year, the President of the United States should
be required to take action. If its not in the constitution, we better get it in there.
It is in the Constitution *******! SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED!
Nope, and I'm not the one saying Obama is "a PHONY" or calling his emotions "crocodile tears."
54% of the 30,000 are from suicide and numerous studies have shown that the presence or absence of a firearm does not change the overall suicide rate. Japan has no private ownership of guns yet has twice the suicide rate of the U.S. I've seen that 30K stat and it's just an outright lie. My guess is that it includes good and bad police shootings, defensive shootings and the handful of accidental shootings that happen every year. Fact is that gun ownership has gone up while gun deaths have gone down. This is just another liberals attempt to take everyone's guns because that's what liberals do. They are nothing but undercover communist who don't like capitalism nor the constitution. Which is why Billary wants the Australian model of gun confiscation.
**** that.
you do realize that this will prevent the very people Bomma wants to remove guns from - the mentally ill or in need - will stop seeking treatment or even not go for fear of their physician(s) violating HIPAA and the government then being able to remove their weapons and ability to defend themselves. an example would be a solider returning from war with PTSD, refusing to go to a mental health physician for help with his PTSD out of fear (imagined or real) of losing his weapons and ability to defend himself.
I do what I wanna do, **** it.
...Bomma's executive orders and bureaucratic overreaches.
How about we just follow the limits put out there by the constitution?
But he was still able to sign enough executive orders...
That ************!
He does what he wants and dares anyone to challenge him.
Nobody dares challenge the First Black President. NOBODY.
Obummer didn't study Constitutional law to uphold the Constitution, he studied it to figure out ways to circumvent it.
Liberals are all fascists at heart...all their ideas come down to FORCING the majority to do whatever they deem proper.
SSShhhhhh, he's a Liberal. It is a part of the party platform to work towards the destruction of the Constitution.
You don't get it do you? It isn't the number of EO it's what they do. If he is subverting congress and using the EOs to get done what he can't get through congress then it's wrong. The president doesn't have the power to use EOs to create laws. Which is exactly what he is doing. Which is why the federal counts have knocked his *** down many times over this.
Also Obama has issued a form of executive action known as the presidential memorandum more often than any other president in history — using it to take unilateral action even as he has signed fewer executive orders. So either you didn't know this or you're being disingenuous.
For the last few presidents, it is my understanding that a majority of EO's deal with menial stuff like recognizing people, naming monuments, bridges, etc. Do pardons go under EO's? Mostly, stuff that doesn't, really, matter. So, as you say, the number is irrelevant and the difference is lost on liberals
I can't remember how many times Tibs or one of his lib buddies has trotted out that ****** tell-you-nothing chart. Like when Will Twitlow kept trotting out his IQ vs. who voted for who by state charts. It doesn't mean what you think it means.