close

Privacy guaranteed - Your email is not shared with anyone.

Shouldnt anti-gunners be called traitors?

Discussion in 'The Okie Corral' started by umadcuzimstylin, Feb 4, 2013.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. kirgi08

    kirgi08 Watcher. Silver Member

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2007
    Messages:
    36,256
    Likes Received:
    5,103
    Location:
    Acme proving grounds.
    Regardless of whether or not they violate the COTUS,the SCOTUS has become a political entity,the ACA ruling is proof of that.All it will take is 1 retirement and the 2a may well be gutted or declared null and void.'08.
     
  2. BRoberts243

    BRoberts243

    Joined:
    May 12, 2010
    Messages:
    204
    Likes Received:
    6
    I believe our rights come from God, not government.
    I have a right to defend myself and my family. if any gov't sees fit to make a law against that then I will be a criminal. as well as several other million people. if you feel compelled to do what daddy government tells you, that's fine, it's your choice and is probably the easier choice.

    I don't arbitrarily disobey laws because i feel like it. there is a difference.

    I have a right to life given to me by God, not Obama or Bush or Washington or the Supreme Court. If there was no government at all I would still have the right. If we were taken over by a foreign army, I still have that right. It is independent of and pre-exists all government. I have a right to defend it as well. I couldn't care less what anyone else has to say about it.
     

  3. philipk

    philipk

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2000
    Messages:
    1,320
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    NE Ohio
    Lift that barge. Tote that bale. Drink a little wine and you land in jail.

    God-given rights just doesn't cut it in the court of law.
     
  4. BRoberts243

    BRoberts243

    Joined:
    May 12, 2010
    Messages:
    204
    Likes Received:
    6
    that's perfectly fine with me
    if it actually came to that, which i don't expect it to, then we'll all be in jail. If the gov't can't trust you with protecting yourself, what makes you think they'll trust you with any responsibility?

    we'll be in the same situation. mine will be called a jail, yours will be called a residential center, or something along those lines.
     
  5. mtber1172

    mtber1172

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2013
    Messages:
    51
    Likes Received:
    0
    Couldn't the same be said for gun nuts who don't want anti gun folks to have freedom of speech?
     
  6. BRoberts243

    BRoberts243

    Joined:
    May 12, 2010
    Messages:
    204
    Likes Received:
    6
    depends.
    is the gun nut a politician who swore to uphold the constitution? then yes.

    if the gun nut a guy on a forum, not actually infringing on someone's rights? just stating he doesn't think they should be able to say it?
    then No

    Now, most 'gun nuts' should support everyone's rights, regardless of if they agree with them or not, but that's not always the case. 'Gun nuts' should support the Constitution more than anyone.

    But a politician actively trying to pass legislation that violates the Constitution is not 'freedom of speech'
     
  7. P99er

    P99er AKA PPQ'er

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2001
    Messages:
    1,948
    Likes Received:
    1,340
    Location:
    My own little world
    I never thought name calling was very constructive.
     
  8. WarCry

    WarCry

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2009
    Messages:
    9,600
    Likes Received:
    1,087
    You're doing the same thing, though. You're declaring that they're trying to pass legislation that violates the the Constitution. That's your OPINION. They believe they are trying to pass legislation that IS within the restrictions applied by the Constitution. That is THEIR opinion. And neither of you are traitors for it.

    You're both, under the FIRST Amendment, expressing your opinions.

    If legislation IS passed, YOUR opinion doesn't carry any weight on whether or not it's Constitutional. That's the job of the courts. You have to the right to pray for relief* if you feel your rights have been violated. THAT is your course of action, other than voting for elected officials and/or running for office yourself.


    Because they believe in their own opinion and that opinion differs from yours still doesn't make them traitors.




    *in this case, before anyone jumps on it, a prayer for relief means a request, and has nothing to do with churches or God.
     
    Last edited: Feb 6, 2013
  9. ChiTownPicaro

    ChiTownPicaro

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2012
    Messages:
    656
    Likes Received:
    0
    You make the claims, then support them. I think you don't have a leg to stand on. So back up what you say instead of demanding others do what you won't do. You sound like an entitled spoiled child who has socialist leanings. Now prove what you posted and support your arguments. Emotion is not proof.

    Post the writings.
     
  10. ChiTownPicaro

    ChiTownPicaro

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2012
    Messages:
    656
    Likes Received:
    0
    So those documents which define blacks as only 3/5s human beings is what you think we should follow? Those same documents that say if you don't have land or are a woman or are not white, then you don't get to vote?
     
  11. HollowHead

    HollowHead Firm member

    Joined:
    May 16, 2005
    Messages:
    25,061
    Likes Received:
    3,153
    Location:
    Where the buffalo roam
    He can't, and I've asked him directly at least twice in this thread. It's very hard to reason with someone whose entire position is based purely on emotion. HH
     
  12. WarCry

    WarCry

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2009
    Messages:
    9,600
    Likes Received:
    1,087
    That's because you can't understand, because you're a progressive.











    .....did I get that response right?
     
  13. certifiedfunds

    certifiedfunds Tewwowist

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2008
    Messages:
    60,060
    Likes Received:
    12,866
    You want me to say, post the federalist papers and anti-federalist papers here on GT? Seriously? Also the body of published writings and speeches by the men involved?

    It's a bit much to spoon feed you.



    Posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire
     
    Last edited: Feb 6, 2013
  14. certifiedfunds

    certifiedfunds Tewwowist

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2008
    Messages:
    60,060
    Likes Received:
    12,866
    You asked me for case law, rulings, supporting the notion that natural rights enshrined in the BOR are more important than subsequent amendments. I stated twice I couldn't. You're better than intellectual dishonesty.


    Posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire
     
  15. certifiedfunds

    certifiedfunds Tewwowist

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2008
    Messages:
    60,060
    Likes Received:
    12,866
    HH a progressive? I really can't recall him posting anything that would support that.

    You on the other hand have a long history of it b


    Posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire
     
  16. HollowHead

    HollowHead Firm member

    Joined:
    May 16, 2005
    Messages:
    25,061
    Likes Received:
    3,153
    Location:
    Where the buffalo roam
    More dead on than a fatal heart attack. The COTUS has no emotional preference. HH
     
    Last edited: Feb 6, 2013
  17. certifiedfunds

    certifiedfunds Tewwowist

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2008
    Messages:
    60,060
    Likes Received:
    12,866
    Some yes some no. While you're reading read up on the reason for the 3/5ths rule. It might make more sense


    Posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire
     
  18. HollowHead

    HollowHead Firm member

    Joined:
    May 16, 2005
    Messages:
    25,061
    Likes Received:
    3,153
    Location:
    Where the buffalo roam
    I'm sorry, Sir but I will uphold the XXIst with the same veracity, verve and conviction as any of the others, including the IInd. They are all equal, period. HH
     
  19. certifiedfunds

    certifiedfunds Tewwowist

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2008
    Messages:
    60,060
    Likes Received:
    12,866
    Sounds emotional, Sir.

    Under the law, you're correct. No debate there. Natural rights predate the law. The BOR simply codifies them.

    You can repeal the second. I still have the right. I may go to jail for it but the right still exists, government simply failed its duty to protect it. If enough people exercise it, government will be ineffective at jailing them all.
     
    Last edited: Feb 7, 2013
  20. Blast

    Blast 'nuff said

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2002
    Messages:
    16,574
    Likes Received:
    413
    Location:
    NKY/Cincinnati area
    True, but they interpret it more closely to the Founders intent.:wavey:
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.