Post by: nddons on March 27, 2018, 09:27:11 AM
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/opinion/john-paul-stevens-repeal-the-second-amendment/ar-BBKKZP0?OCID=ansmsnnews11
I guess when you’re 97 years old freedom means being able to walk across the room without shitting yourself instead of ensuring against tyranny for your self and our progeny.
What a fucktard.
Post by: LevelWing on March 27, 2018, 09:43:31 AM
His argument about a tyrannical government is also one that doesn't work. I'd be curious how many governments are in existence today either wouldn't be in existence or would be acting very differently if their citizens had the ability to defend themselves.
As an aside, the retired associate justice is entitled to his beliefs and opinions just like everyone else. I see nothing wrong with him expressing those opinions and I see nothing wrong with engaging in this debate. It's important that we have this conversation and even more important we continue to express the reasoning for disagreement with it.
Post by: invflatspin on March 27, 2018, 09:56:20 AM
I also don't understand his desire to 'weaken the NRA's ability to stymie legislation...'? Why would a top list jurist want to silence a private club/organization which supports one of the founding BOR amendments? So you don't agree with the NRA, does that mean the SCOTUS should take up a position to try to muzzle or silence us? It surely sounds like the path is to: decimate the 2nd A. Reduce, and limit the 1st A. Restrict and further limit the 4th and 5th while we're on a roll.
Heck, why don't we just toss out everything up to 11th?
Know what else is missing from his diatribe? Limits, regulation, inspection, reduction, control of weapons in the hands of million of LEO at all levels. Hmmmm. Restrict or eliminate the rights of the people, and do what? Increase the number of weapons under fed/state/county/city control? Yeah - that's worked out so well in; Nazi Germany. Soviet Russia. Kampuchea. East Europe. Central Africa. And not to forget - Venezuela as we speak. Maybe he should move there, no private guns anymore!
Post by: nddons on March 27, 2018, 10:00:05 AM
I disagree with everything he said. The statistics don't support his argument and this piece is timed with the marches and the recent surge in support for stronger gun control by a limited group. He knows that a repeal of the Second Amendment isn't going to happen. Considering a Democrat controlled Senate and White House couldn't pass anything, let alone what they really wanted, that should tell you something.I’m curious why you included your third paragraph. Who’s saying he shouldn’t say what he said?
His argument about a tyrannical government is also one that doesn't work. I'd be curious how many governments are in existence today either wouldn't be in existence or would be acting very differently if their citizens had the ability to defend themselves.
As an aside, the retired associate justice is entitled to his beliefs and opinions just like everyone else. I see nothing wrong with him expressing those opinions and I see nothing wrong with engaging in this debate. It's important that we have this conversation and even more important we continue to express the reasoning for disagreement with it.
Debates and conversations imply a two way exchange. He was free to write his piece, as I am free to ridicule it as the antipathy of freedom and liberty.
Post by: LevelWing on March 27, 2018, 10:07:12 AM
Quote from: Aaron Blake/Washington Post
In a New York Times op-ed on Tuesday, Stevens calls for a repeal of the Second Amendment. The move might as well be considered an in-kind contribution to the National Rifle Association, to Republicans' efforts to keep the House and Senate in 2018, and to President Trump's 2020 reelection bid. In one fell swoop, Stevens has lent credence to the talking point that the left really just wants to get rid of gun ownership and reasserted the need for gun-rights supporters to prevent his ilk from ever being appointed again (with the most obvious answer being: Vote Republican).
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2018/03/27/john-paul-stevenss-supremely-unhelpful-call-to-repeal-the-second-amendment/?utm_term=.9fb8bfe83b84
Post by: LevelWing on March 27, 2018, 10:09:23 AM
I’m curious why you included your third paragraph. Who’s saying he shouldn’t say what he said?You are free to ridicule it but I don't find that name calling moves the debate forward any, but that's just my opinion.
Debates and conversations imply a two way exchange. He was free to write his piece, as I am free to ridicule it as the antipathy of freedom and liberty.
Post by: Anthony on March 28, 2018, 08:22:59 AM
You are free to ridicule it but I don't find that name calling moves the debate forward any, but that's just my opinion.
Did I miss it? Who was name calling? I have no problem people protesting my Right to own a gun. However, the display in D.C. was NOT a protest. It was a political, partisan, government, union, and rich guy funded, and promoted DISPLAY. It is a movement to remove RIGHTS, and CHOICES from law abiding citizens. It is not intended to curtail violent crime.
Post by: EppyGA - White Christian Domestic Terrorist on March 28, 2018, 09:22:19 AM
Post by: Anthony on March 28, 2018, 10:46:46 AM
Doesn't matter, Debbie WhatsHerName is going to take the bullets away since their is no Amendment that covers your right to have bullets. ;)
Don't laugh. California is already doing it. They are now requiring all ammo go to an FFL holder where a background check needs to be done prior to purchase. I wonder how they are treating reloading supplies.
http://www.breitbart.com/california/2018/01/01/california-ushers-2018-ammunition-control/
Post by: President in Exile YOLT on March 28, 2018, 11:44:47 AM
Post by: invflatspin on March 28, 2018, 01:08:25 PM
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/03/27/spending-bill-passed-by-congress-could-disarm-some-veterans-gop-lawmaker-warns.html
Yes, Trump signed this.
Post by: nddons on March 28, 2018, 01:36:07 PM
Post by: President in Exile YOLT on March 29, 2018, 10:31:03 AM