GlockTalk.com
Home Forums Classifieds Blogs Today's Posts Search Social Groups



  
SIGN-UP
Notices

Glock Talk
Welcome To The Glock Talk Forums.
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 02-04-2013, 05:18   #1
umadcuzimstylin
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Texas
Posts: 56
Shouldnt anti-gunners be called traitors?

I can understand accidentally going against the Constitution but intentionally going against the Constitution makes you a traitor.
umadcuzimstylin is offline  
Old 02-04-2013, 05:21   #2
SIG-SOG
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: DFW
Posts: 293
Quote:
Originally Posted by umadcuzimstylin View Post
I can understand accidentally going against the Constitution but intentionally going against the Constitution makes you a traitor.
And a POS.
SIG-SOG is offline  
Old 02-04-2013, 05:26   #3
Bren
NRA Life Member
 
Bren's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Kentucky
Posts: 33,408
I agree, but so far the Supreme Court has only found that the constitution gives you a right to own some kind of gun - not specifically anything they are trying to ban right now. Everything else is just our opinion.

Not to mention, we all oppose somebody's constitutional rights on some issue, whether it's the Westboro Baptists Church, the KKK, the Brady Campaign, Occupy ______, or the democrat party.
__________________
Open carry activists are to gun rights what the Westboro Baptist Church is to free speech.
Bren is offline  
Old 02-04-2013, 05:29   #4
Blast
'nuff said
 
Blast's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: NKY/Cincinnati area
Posts: 19,621


Liberals misinterpret the Constitution to fit their agendas.
__________________
A man should look for what is, and not for what he thinks should be - Albert Einstein
Blast is offline  
Old 02-04-2013, 06:00   #5
devildog2067
Senior Member
 
devildog2067's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Near Chicago, IL
Posts: 15,762
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blast View Post
Liberals misinterpret the Constitution to fit their agendas.
Be honest, conservatives do too.
devildog2067 is offline  
Old 02-04-2013, 06:18   #6
umadcuzimstylin
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Texas
Posts: 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blast View Post
Liberals misinterpret the Constitution to fit their agendas.
Sophists gonna sophist.
umadcuzimstylin is offline  
Old 02-04-2013, 06:27   #7
umadcuzimstylin
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Texas
Posts: 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bren View Post
I agree, but so far the Supreme Court has only found that the constitution gives you a right to own some kind of gun - not specifically anything they are trying to ban right now. Everything else is just our opinion.

Not to mention, we all oppose somebody's constitutional rights on some issue, whether it's the Westboro Baptists Church, the KKK, the Brady Campaign, Occupy ______, or the democrat party.
Thats insane! It doesnt say in the 2nd amendment that you have the right to bear arms at the governments discretion.
umadcuzimstylin is offline  
Old 02-04-2013, 06:27   #8
Wolfdad
Senior Member
 
Wolfdad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 410
The philosophy of conservatism emphasizes liberty. The philosophy of liberalisim emphasizes control.
Wolfdad is offline  
Old 02-04-2013, 06:37   #9
IhRedrider
Not a walker
 
IhRedrider's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 506
Well, to stand against the Constitution only makes your action illegal thus you are a criminal. To be found a traitor, the US would have to be at war. Oh wait, we do have the war on terrorism, the war on poverty, the war on drugs........ I wonder how much a good set of gallows cost.
IhRedrider is offline  
Old 02-04-2013, 06:47   #10
certifiedfunds
Platinum Membership
Tewwowist
 
certifiedfunds's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: NYC
Posts: 39,703


Quote:
Originally Posted by Wolfdad View Post
The philosophy of conservatism emphasizes liberty. The philosophy of liberalisim emphasizes control.
Correct. My political philosophy imposes nothing on them. Their political philosophy imposes on me.
certifiedfunds is offline  
Old 02-04-2013, 06:52   #11
HerrGlock
CLM Number 2
Scouts Out
 
HerrGlock's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Posts: 64,411


I don't know about traitors.

I prefer the descriptor "urinalysis taste testers", personally.
__________________
Sent from my rotary phone
"The way I see it as soon as a baby is born, he should be issued a banjo!"- Linus Van Pelt
UNIX - Not just for Vestal Virgins any more
HerrGlock is offline  
Old 02-04-2013, 06:54   #12
Gallium
CLM Number 182
Charter Lifetime Member
 
Gallium's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 47,557


Specifically every politician, military person, police officer, judge, etc who swears an oath to protect and defend the constitution of the USA is a liar and traitor IF and when they decide the 2nd Amendment is only a convenience that can be bypassed.

Specifically, I wish folks like Holder, Obama, Cuomo, Schumer, et al could be charged and tried for crimes against the state, because really, their actions border on criminal.

Simply replace "2nd amendment" with "1st amendment" to see the point.

- G
Gallium is offline  
Old 02-04-2013, 07:17   #13
Bren
NRA Life Member
 
Bren's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Kentucky
Posts: 33,408
Quote:
Originally Posted by umadcuzimstylin View Post
Thats insane! It doesnt say in the 2nd amendment that you have the right to bear arms at the governments discretion.
It also doesn't say which arms you have a right to bear or how many or how big the magazine can be or when and where you can bear them. That is all left to court interpretation. Every right in the bill of rights is subject to government discretion - each one has a library full of law defining what the government can and cannot do, except for the 2nd Amendment, which doesn't have enough law to fill a smll notebook.
__________________
Open carry activists are to gun rights what the Westboro Baptist Church is to free speech.
Bren is offline  
Old 02-04-2013, 07:21   #14
kensb2
pistol n00b
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Apache, OK
Posts: 1,464
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bren View Post
It also doesn't say which arms you have a right to bear or how many or how big the magazine can be or when and where you can bear them. That is all left to court interpretation. Every right in the bill of rights is subject to government discretion - each one has a library full of law defining what the government can and cannot do, except for the 2nd Amendment, which doesn't have enough law to fill a smll notebook.
I thought that the 2A provides protection from the FED .gov regarding the RKBA, and basically left it up to the individual states to decide what weapons their citizens have. This makes the most sense to me, since the citizens are supposed to have weapons to defend their state from FED .gov tyranny. Why does the SCOTUS have to make this so complicated?
kensb2 is offline  
Old 02-04-2013, 07:30   #15
M&P Shooter
Metal Member
 
M&P Shooter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: PA
Posts: 10,436
Shouldnt anti-gunners be called traitors?

Yes, this administration belongs behind bars and I bet there's 4 Americans in their graves from Benghazi right now agreeing with me
__________________
I walk through the valley of the shadow of death but it's cool because my Glock 23 is loaded with 180gr HST!
M&P Shooter is offline  
Old 02-04-2013, 07:48   #16
Bren
NRA Life Member
 
Bren's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Kentucky
Posts: 33,408
Quote:
Originally Posted by kensb2 View Post
I thought that the 2A provides protection from the FED .gov regarding the RKBA, and basically left it up to the individual states to decide what weapons their citizens have. This makes the most sense to me, since the citizens are supposed to have weapons to defend their state from FED .gov tyranny. Why does the SCOTUS have to make this so complicated?
No, the 2nd Amendment says you have a right, enforceable against the federal fgovernment only, to keep and bear arms. The supreme court said, recently, in McDonald, that the 14th Amendment means that the states are also not allowed to violate the 2nd Amendment. Nothing about the 2nd Amendment has ever said "this issue is reserved to the states."

The 10th amendment says "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people," but under the current interpretation of either the commerce clause or the taxing power, the feds have authority to regulate guns, expresssly delegated by the constitution.
__________________
Open carry activists are to gun rights what the Westboro Baptist Church is to free speech.
Bren is offline  
Old 02-04-2013, 07:56   #17
arclight610
Senior Member
 
arclight610's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 3,016
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bren View Post
It also doesn't say which arms you have a right to bear or how many or how big the magazine can be or when and where you can bear them. That is all left to court interpretation. Every right in the bill of rights is subject to government discretion - each one has a library full of law defining what the government can and cannot do, except for the 2nd Amendment, which doesn't have enough law to fill a smll notebook.
In United States v Miller in 1939, the Supreme Court ruled that the 2nd amendment only protected military style weapons commonly used in the military and militia at that time.
arclight610 is offline  
Old 02-04-2013, 08:02   #18
umadcuzimstylin
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Texas
Posts: 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bren View Post
It also doesn't say which arms you have a right to bear or how many or how big the magazine can be or when and where you can bear them. That is all left to court interpretation. Every right in the bill of rights is subject to government discretion - each one has a library full of law defining what the government can and cannot do, except for the 2nd Amendment, which doesn't have enough law to fill a smll notebook.
Exactly! It is written vague to not have restrictions not for the government to decide how they restrict you. It says you have the right to bear arms which means open carry any gun you want. It plainly says right to bear arms yet the government thinks it say right to bear arms according to your interpretation lulz.

Last edited by umadcuzimstylin; 02-04-2013 at 08:23..
umadcuzimstylin is offline  
Old 02-04-2013, 08:06   #19
PhotoFeller
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Midwest and south
Posts: 2,681
Blog Entries: 2
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bren View Post
No, the 2nd Amendment says you have a right, enforceable against the federal fgovernment only, to keep and bear arms. The supreme court said, recently, in McDonald, that the 14th Amendment means that the states are also not allowed to violate the 2nd Amendment. Nothing about the 2nd Amendment has ever said "this issue is reserved to the states."

The 10th amendment says "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people," but under the current interpretation of either the commerce clause or the taxing power, the feds have authority to regulate guns, expresssly delegated by the constitution.
Bren- Please boil the Supreme Court's rulings on 2A down to the fundamental issue: Is it clear, in your judgement, that Congress can legislate bans against certain weapons and magazines?

Last edited by PhotoFeller; 02-04-2013 at 08:09..
PhotoFeller is offline  
Old 02-04-2013, 08:08   #20
SPIN2010
Searching ...
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: On the move ... again!
Posts: 1,840
Quote:
Originally Posted by kensb2 View Post
I thought that the 2A provides protection from the FED .gov regarding the RKBA, and basically left it up to the individual states to decide what weapons their citizens have. This makes the most sense to me, since the citizens are supposed to have weapons to defend their state from FED .gov tyranny.
You just have to look to NYS to see how effective that theory is. Can anyone really believe the STATE.GOV & FED.GOV are not kissing cousins? Just look to Katrina after action ... that was patriotic by all the LEO/NG/ACTIVE MIL wasn't it? GET FOR REAL!

Last edited by SPIN2010; 02-04-2013 at 08:09..
SPIN2010 is offline  
Old 02-04-2013, 09:23   #21
Wolfdad
Senior Member
 
Wolfdad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 410
"shall not be infringed"
Wolfdad is offline  
Old 02-04-2013, 09:42   #22
pizza_pablo
USN Retired
 
pizza_pablo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Western WA
Posts: 2,576
Yes!!
__________________
If liberals don't want us to treat every Muslim like a terrorist, why do they treat every gun owner like the Newtown shooter?
pizza_pablo is offline  
Old 02-04-2013, 10:04   #23
WarCry
Senior Member
 
WarCry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: IL, on the banks of the Muddy River
Posts: 7,214
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wolfdad View Post
"shall not be infringed"
This argument needs to end, because it makes gun rights crowd look bullheaded, stubborn, and uneducated.

Let me give you another example:

"Congress shall make no law [...] abridging the freedom of speech"

And yet the FCC exists, restricting content of broadcasts.

When you start standing up for full-blown, hard-core porn to be broadcast on NBC at 7pm, then you can make the "shall not be infringed" arguments.

As for the Supreme Court on AWB/magazine restrictions, it has yet to be determined. "Heller" said reasonable restrictions are acceptable. "McDonald" said that applies to the States as well. And "Reasonable" has yet to be decided, but I'm willing to bet a case will be coming soon, probably out of New York, that will help make that determination.
__________________
"If you have something to say, now would be a perfect time to keep it to yourself." --Col. Chester Phillips
"If you believe everything you read, better not read." --Japanese proverb
WarCry is offline  
Old 02-04-2013, 10:38   #24
kirgi08
Silver Membership
Watcher.
 
kirgi08's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Acme proving grounds.
Posts: 26,647
Blog Entries: 1


Quote:
Originally Posted by Wolfdad View Post
"shall not be infringed"
Ayep.

Quote:
Originally Posted by pizza_pablo View Post
Yes!!


Quote:
Originally Posted by WarCry View Post
This argument needs to end, because it makes gun rights crowd look bullheaded, stubborn, and uneducated.

It is the law of the land........

Let me give you another example:

"Congress shall make no law [...] abridging the freedom of speech"

This is the crux.

And yet the FCC exists, restricting content of broadcasts.

So do a bunch of .gub folk that Illegally do the same thing.This nation has gone about the systematic destruction of the COTUS.FDR started it and them their folk that can vote for raises and or money fer votes.That is how Santa got ta park his sleigh at 1600 yet again.

When you start standing up for full-blown, hard-core porn to be broadcast on NBC at 7pm, then you can make the "shall not be infringed" arguments.

Porn =s the 2a.

As for the Supreme Court on AWB/magazine restrictions, it has yet to be determined. "Heller" said reasonable restrictions are acceptable. "McDonald" said that applies to the States as well. And "Reasonable" has yet to be decided, but I'm willing to bet a case will be coming soon, probably out of New York, that will help make that determination.
SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED,KEEP IT SIMPLE.......... .'08.
__________________
I'd rather be judged by 12 than carried by 6

If you look like food,You will be eaten.

Rip Chad.You will be missed.
kirgi08 is offline  
Old 02-04-2013, 11:02   #25
WarCry
Senior Member
 
WarCry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: IL, on the banks of the Muddy River
Posts: 7,214
Quote:
Originally Posted by kirgi08 View Post
Ayep.

Porn =s the 2a?
Of course not, and that's just showing you're being willfully narrow-minded.

Porn DOES = the FIRST Amendment (the courts have said so), but it's still RESTRICTED on when/where/how it can be displayed.

Why are you okay with restrictions on the First Amendment?
__________________
"If you have something to say, now would be a perfect time to keep it to yourself." --Col. Chester Phillips
"If you believe everything you read, better not read." --Japanese proverb
WarCry is offline  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump




All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:51.



Homepage
FAQ
Forums
Calendar
Advertise
Gallery
GT Wiki
GT Blogs
Social Groups
Classifieds


Users Currently Online: 703
194 Members
509 Guests

Most users ever online: 2,244
Nov 11, 2013 at 11:42