Another school shooting - Page 11 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Talk about what you've seen in the news today.

Moderator: PoFo Today's News Mods

By B0ycey
#15050283
Finfinder wrote:You said clear, there is nothing clear about it you can have the last post until eternity but until then you can own guns as an individual and not be in a militia and that is as clear as day.


Well the last post is a statement then. You have so many guns that to make them illegal is pointless. But those who want to stop legislation that will at least let the authorities monitor and test individuals as well as simple protections that will stop weapons going into the wrong hands are basically idiots that need to be shot by those same individuals that are a risk of danger to understand why legislation is needed. :roll:
#15050285
B0ycey wrote:Well the last post is a statement then. You have so many guns that to make them illegal is pointless. But those who want to stop legislation that will at least let the authorities monitor and test individuals as well as simple protections that will stop weapons going into the wrong hands are basically idiots that need to be shot by those same individuals that are a risk of danger to understand why legislation is needed. :roll:


That really is just a talking point. You are getting to the crux of this though. .

First those suggestion are the intended plan of ending the 2nd in the style of death by 10,0000 paper cuts. The left will never ever be satisfied with just your suggestion

More so the Democrats and the left in our country lack the political courage to do anything. It's just for show they would rather get elected and they won't by being gun grabbers.

BTW you complain that the gun lobby is strong I'll say the anti gun lobby is as strong or stronger its called ABC, CBS ,CNNN, MSNBS, NBC and other liberal media outlets.
#15050293
So what just because you want to cling to one word that doesn't make it "clearly". You do not have to belong to a militia to own guns and because you are afraid of guns doesn't make your argument true. My arguments are backed by the US Supreme Court.


This is correct. The SCOTUS has separated the right to keep arms from the militia statement in part. But not entirely. Besides. I know of nobody here who is arguing that we ought to ban arms entirely. The SCOTUS has also ruled (in the same decision that affirmed that people have the right to arms independent of militia membership) that guns can be carefully regulated. That is the part of the decision that gun nuts wish to ignore.


Lobby ? What does that have to do with anything.


:lol: No. This is the stupidest thing on PFO this week.
Last edited by Drlee on 23 Nov 2019 00:02, edited 1 time in total.
#15050325
BigSteve wrote:Of course.

But requiring someone to pay a fee so they can get mandatory training is wrong. If the government wants to require it, the government can pick up the tab.

And I hardly need someone to buy my own guns and ammunition...


Oh dear. This is a conundrum, isn't it? Me, a socialist friendly soul wanting you to take re$ponability for this and you, who has grumbled repeatedly about the rank stupidly of socialism suddenly thinks it's the right thing to do. :lol: how did that happen? Ok, we'll figure this out, but I must dash
User avatar
By Drlee
#15050366
Two people, including a student, have been arrested in connection with a serious threat against a South Los Angeles middle school, and an AR-15 assault rifle and a list of targeted students have been seized, the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department said Friday.



Sigh.
By Rich
#15050424
Its amazing how many people, can not understand basic English. The SA doesn't mention a right to form militias, well regulated or otherwise. It talks about the right of the people to bear arms. The people has a very clear meaning in the Constitution, it means citizens independent of government structures. The People are counter-posed to both the Federal Government and the States governments. The people have an inherent and explicit right to bear arms and don't need permission from the Federal or State governments.

The first clause is an additional injunction of the need for arms to be held outside of government control, ie not a soldier who has signed away much of his liberty whether to State or Federal government. There is also an implicit warning that the infringement of the right to bear arms of individuals threatens the freedoms of the collective. The fact that the need for militias, for the bulk of the force of arms, to lie outside of government control has been ignored, doesn't weaken the case for individual gun rights, it strengthens it.

The power of the central government and their corporate bed fellows at Facebook Twitter and Google is increasing at a terrifying rate. To yet further erode the power and autonomy of the individual is insane.
#15050425
:lol: @Rich
Rich wrote:The SA doesn't mention a right to form militias, well regulated or otherwise.
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. - US 2nd Amendment.

Yeah, it only BEGINS with that statement. :roll:
  • 1
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11

No he wasn't. Hitler didn't even attend a meeting[…]

The Irishman...

DeNiro got snubbed because he's a dick and the H[…]

I have a suggestion to anyone reading that who is[…]

And that only makes sense if they had a common […]