Started By
Message

re: A Democrat candidate for President advocated gun confiscation by the Federal government

Posted on 6/28/19 at 10:59 pm to
Posted by AUsteriskPride
Albuquerque, NM
Member since Feb 2011
18385 posts
Posted on 6/28/19 at 10:59 pm to
Welp, I'm sure they'll be the first ones to bust down a door and take them.
Posted by Tiger in Texas
Houston, Texas
Member since Sep 2004
20872 posts
Posted on 6/28/19 at 11:05 pm to
If the Dems cheat or convince enough brain dead people to vote out Trump in 2020, there will be a mad rush to buy up every type of assault weapon! I will be one of them...the only question is if I get an AK-47 or go with an AR...
Posted by Clames
Member since Oct 2010
16568 posts
Posted on 6/28/19 at 11:06 pm to
quote:


The 2nd explicitly relates to a well regulated militia. Your reading that it also refers to an individual's right to bear arms outside the context of serving in the militia, ignores the plain reading of the amendment.


Amazing when poorly educated simpletons like you imagine they have a clue here. First, you need to read 10 U.S.C. 311 and learn the definition of "militia" here. Second, you need to read v. Heller and pay attention to this part on the first page:

quote:

. The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home.

(a) The Amendment’s prefatory clause announces a purpose, but
does not limit or expand the scope of the second part, the operative clause. The operative clause’s text and history demonstrate that it connotes an individual right to keep and bear arms


Simple to understand, even for a mouth-breather like you.

Posted by Vacherie Saint
Member since Aug 2015
39451 posts
Posted on 6/28/19 at 11:12 pm to
I see Tex is here trying to pass off Eric Swallwell talking points off as constitutional legal scholarship.

I’m going to enjoy watching you slowly constrict her before swallowing her whole.
Posted by MAGA
Member since Sep 2016
581 posts
Posted on 6/28/19 at 11:18 pm to
quote:


If the Dems cheat or convince enough brain dead people to vote out Trump in 2020, there will be a mad rush to buy up every type of assault weapon! I will be one of them...the only question is if I get an AK-47 or go with an AR...


You just watched every democrat tell you what they plan to do.

You should start preparing now while you have time and the things you may need are cheap and plentiful.

They will win another election.

I wish I still had all my stuff. Damn boat sunk with it all.
Posted by volod
Leesville, LA
Member since Jun 2014
5392 posts
Posted on 6/29/19 at 12:42 pm to
quote:


The American revolution was fought by gun owning Americans against an oppressive government. That's why they guaranteed us that right. And that's why we will die before we surrender that right to the government.





We actually agree on something. The only thing we disagree on is the feasibility of it.

Even with military grade firearms, the chances of civilians defeating a trained military with Artillery and Air to Suface weapons is very low.

Then there's the matter of how many people will actually fight the government. Even during the Revolutionary war you had Tories. Today people arguably have more to lose.

And the government is smart enough not to outright oppress people. They will simply strip your privileges piecemeal so that you barely notice (see automatic weapons ban)
Posted by Taxing Authority
Houston
Member since Feb 2010
57223 posts
Posted on 6/29/19 at 1:48 pm to
quote:

Even with military grade firearms, the chances of civilians defeating a trained military with Artillery and Air to Suface weapons is very low.
Why are we still in Iraq and Afghanistan? Why did USSR withdraw from Afghanistan? Why did we withdraw from Vietnam?

quote:

And the government is smart enough not to outright oppress people.
Have you never taken a history course? Our (Democrat hero Roosevelt-led) government put people in camps for being Asian. In more modern terms.. have listened to anything coming from the democrat candidates?
This post was edited on 6/29/19 at 1:50 pm
Posted by troyt37
Member since Mar 2008
13343 posts
Posted on 6/29/19 at 2:25 pm to
quote:

Even with military grade firearms, the chances of civilians defeating a trained military with Artillery and Air to Suface weapons is very low.


First you assume the military will be willing to fire upon their mothers, fathers, brothers, sisters, and own children.

Second you assume that patriots are going to sit with targets on top of their head, instead of going after the bureaucracy, their families and children, legislators, judges, and all those who support and defend them. Open season is open season. You fire on my family, I’m firing on yours. I’m also making the biggest bombs I can manage, to destroy your home, your work, and anywhere else you, your family, or your support may be.

May not sound too scary, as I’m only one man. But there could be 2000, or 20 million of me.
This post was edited on 6/29/19 at 2:32 pm
Posted by EKG
Houston, TX
Member since Jun 2010
44017 posts
Posted on 6/29/19 at 2:27 pm to
quote:

A Democrat candidate for President advocated gun confiscation by the Federal government

Which is the EXACT reason for the Second Amendment.
Posted by victoire sécurisé
Member since Nov 2012
4894 posts
Posted on 6/29/19 at 2:33 pm to
As someone who leans farther left than most of the Proud Boyz on this site, even I agree that any buyback, voluntary or mandatory is a foolish idea.
Posted by troyt37
Member since Mar 2008
13343 posts
Posted on 6/29/19 at 3:28 pm to
Proud Boyz. Lol.
Posted by texridder
The Woodlands, TX
Member since Oct 2017
14179 posts
Posted on 6/30/19 at 1:27 am to
quote:

dumbass, the Constitution doesn’t grant rights. It recognizes rights, and restrains the government from trampling them. And even if the Constitution doesn’t enumerate those rights, we still have them.
it's in the Bill of Rights, dork.
Posted by Pelican fan99
Lafayette, Louisiana
Member since Jun 2013
34729 posts
Posted on 6/30/19 at 1:41 am to
quote:

Key word "Assault Weapon"





Assault is a made up term to make these guns seem super scary
Posted by texridder
The Woodlands, TX
Member since Oct 2017
14179 posts
Posted on 6/30/19 at 2:17 am to
quote:

The 5-4 split only concerns the scope of that individual right, the decision put the final nails in the coffin of the collective right interpretation theories of the 2nd Amendment. Theories that have never enjoyed meaningful support outside of a few legal scholars and retards like you.
apparently you have never read the Supreme Court's decision in U.S. v. Cruikshank, because if you had you wouldn't be making a fool jackass of yourself on here.
Posted by texridder
The Woodlands, TX
Member since Oct 2017
14179 posts
Posted on 6/30/19 at 2:27 am to
quote:

Amazing when poorly educated simpletons like you imagine they have a clue here. First, you need to read 10 U.S.C. 311 and learn the definition of "militia" here
Wait, did you just tell me to read a section of the U.S. Code to find the definition of militia as it was used in the Bills of Rights in 1791? You couldn't be that stupid, could you?
This post was edited on 6/30/19 at 2:55 am
Posted by AHCOO
Somewhere Texas
Member since Sep 2015
455 posts
Posted on 6/30/19 at 2:32 am to
quote:

ring last night’s debate.

‘Mandatory buy back’ for ‘assault weapons’

They finally aren’t hiding it


Bro as someone who works for the government I can tell you right now gun confiscation will never happen.. the second amendment is set in stone and no one will touch it!
Posted by davyjones
NELA
Member since Feb 2019
30112 posts
Posted on 6/30/19 at 2:33 am to
quote:

Key word "Assault Weapon"

Assault is a made up term to make these guns seem super scary

What's ironic here is that D.C. v Heller makes specific reference to "self-defense" as a justification in the Court's application of 2nd A protection to the individual. I feel safe in assuming they're mostly referring to self-defense from human threats, thus the "assault weapon" is the tool conceived exactly for that job more or less.
Posted by MeatCleaverWeaver
Member since Oct 2013
22175 posts
Posted on 6/30/19 at 7:09 am to
quote:

First you assume the military will be willing to fire upon their mothers, fathers, brothers, sisters, and own children.



I doubt it would be the military charged with confiscation - at least at the onset - most likely LEAs. The argument of “you’ll never be able to stand up to the military anyway so why do you need an AR” has so many flaws, and you pointed out one of the bigger ones.
Posted by Goforit
Member since Apr 2019
4753 posts
Posted on 6/30/19 at 7:11 am to
There would be a revolution.
Jump to page
Page First 9 10 11
Jump to page
first pageprev pagePage 11 of 11Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram