social license
- Thread starter Hayduke
- Start date
- Status
Kreyzhorse
New member
Sarah Brady owns a rifle too........... Bought as a straw purchase for he son. Doesn't mean she supports gun rights does it?
Last edited:
Stagger Lee
New member
Why is he a troll? Because he's not a sheep, marching in lockstep with the rest of the extremist Stepford Thinkers? Or because he's disagreed with you in other threads and you're tired of it?
I love how the ones here who beat their chests the loudest over the concept of being "free" in regards to guns are also the ones trying their hardest to suppress the speech and participation of anyone who doesn't parrot their own extreme and often out-of-sorts with the mainstream thinking.
I love how the ones here who beat their chests the loudest over the concept of being "free" in regards to guns are also the ones trying their hardest to suppress the speech and participation of anyone who doesn't parrot their own extreme and often out-of-sorts with the mainstream thinking.
Brian Pfleuger
Moderator Emeritus
Oath of the President and I dare say the duty of every American.
It was meant to be taken literally for as long as our nation exists. Fluctuating standards are the problem not the solution. Some things are black and white, right and wrong, forever.
Stagger Lee
New member
OK, but this isn't about "the Constitution" (which, BTW, is interpreted by our Supreme Court, not each person individually). It's about openly carrying a gun in a public library and other places where it may (and apparently does) offend people...people who get to vote and petition their legislators just like we do.
Rights are great, but by not showing a little common sense and failing to choose our battles carefully, we can easily cause ours to be lost. Why pick fights that don't need to be picked? Putting a pistol in the public's face for no other reason that to make them see it so that they "get used to it" isn't really smart or worth doing, IMHO. and that's the issue, not the Constitution.
Rights are great, but by not showing a little common sense and failing to choose our battles carefully, we can easily cause ours to be lost. Why pick fights that don't need to be picked? Putting a pistol in the public's face for no other reason that to make them see it so that they "get used to it" isn't really smart or worth doing, IMHO. and that's the issue, not the Constitution.
Brian Pfleuger
Moderator Emeritus
If I'm not mistaken open carry used to be one of those "rights". The problem is many of us "lost" that right. No we didn't we had it TAKEN from us. That's one of the keys from the founders, they recognized that government doesn't give you rights, it protects them. The taking of a right by the government doesn't mean it's not still right. It means the government is WRONG. I guess, when we lose a right we just stop fighting for that one and try to protect the rest? Not me, I'll protect what I have and fight for the restoration of the ones lost.
Stagger Lee said:
It's like ACLU defending flag burners. Are all ACLU members flag burners?
Even though most here would not open carry, we have to stand up for
the egregious example so that our rights are not slowly eroded until
we have as few rights as the average Chinese.
The SCOTUS has authority to resolve disputes about the COTUS, but a citizenry who understand or have opinions about their own laws and constitution are a facet of american politics. The issue of S8's opinion involves his view of the COTUS. In this sense the COTUS is the issue.
A right that is lost if exercised isn't a right in a conventional sense. We may find open carry distasteful (as opposed to 19th century authorities who disliked concealed carry), but a right can involve doing a distasteful thing.
Interesting question. What is your answer?
Dust Monkey
New member
Yes and no. IMO there are 4 branches of Govt. Executive, Legislative, Judical AND We the People. Dont ever forget that.
Jefferson new this. It is stated in our founding documents.
"That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness."
Brian Pfleuger
Moderator Emeritus
Now-a-days the very government spoken of calls that being a traitor. Seems we are now expected to be absolutely in allegiance to the PRESENT government, not the COTUS which it is supposed to represent.
peetzakilla said:
To be fair, the Bush administrations has played fast and loose with the
Constitution, after 9/11. I know most of us like the Bush administration's
stance on guns, but if the Patriot Act is medicine it seems worse than the
disease it was supposed to cure.
And for people who don't really understand what we mean by the Constitution
(I don't mean you peetza), we're usually talking about the Bill of Rights, which
are amendments to the Consitution. Yes, it can be amended and kept relevant,
just like the 1911 has been updated and has remained relevant.
Stagger Lee
New member
Can there be anything more annoying than people who cut-paste out-of-context statements from one or more Founders as an answer to every question posed today?
I mean, I know that it's easier than thinking up an actual response and sticking by it, but it doesn't help the actual discussion one way or the other. I don't honestly believe that our nation's founders would advocate that we overthrow the government that they created just over the issue of whether or not we can (or should) carry guns openly in libraries. And "should" is the real issue here. The Constitution allows each one of you to just walk up to the first dozen strangers you encounter on the street and tell them that they smell bad and have lousy taste in clothing (even if they don't), but few here appear willing to defend that Constitutional right to the same extreme. Why is that? or is it only ok to offend people if they can see that you have a gun?
I mean, I know that it's easier than thinking up an actual response and sticking by it, but it doesn't help the actual discussion one way or the other. I don't honestly believe that our nation's founders would advocate that we overthrow the government that they created just over the issue of whether or not we can (or should) carry guns openly in libraries. And "should" is the real issue here. The Constitution allows each one of you to just walk up to the first dozen strangers you encounter on the street and tell them that they smell bad and have lousy taste in clothing (even if they don't), but few here appear willing to defend that Constitutional right to the same extreme. Why is that? or is it only ok to offend people if they can see that you have a gun?
Dust Monkey
New member
Just remember this when you read the Bill of Rights. There is a preamble, that is more often forgotten or ignored.
Effective December 15, 1791
Articles in addition to, and Amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America, proposed by Congress, and ratified by the Legislatures of the several States, pursuant to the fifth Article of the original Constitution.
PREAMBLE
The conventions of a number of the States having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will best insure the beneficent ends of its institution.
That should explain everything you need to know about rights. The constitution and the BOR are restrictions on the government. Let me say that again. Restrictions on government. A line in the sand that government will not cross. And if it does, it is up to the people to take care of that problem.
Remember the old saying, IIRC, soap box, ballot box, lastly, the cartridge box.
Effective December 15, 1791
Articles in addition to, and Amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America, proposed by Congress, and ratified by the Legislatures of the several States, pursuant to the fifth Article of the original Constitution.
PREAMBLE
The conventions of a number of the States having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will best insure the beneficent ends of its institution.
That should explain everything you need to know about rights. The constitution and the BOR are restrictions on the government. Let me say that again. Restrictions on government. A line in the sand that government will not cross. And if it does, it is up to the people to take care of that problem.
Remember the old saying, IIRC, soap box, ballot box, lastly, the cartridge box.
Dust Monkey
New member
Because the Founders new what they were doing when the kicked people like you out of the country and set up America.
If someone wants to carry a gun in a library, I think they should be able to. If you get offended, pound sand. You dont not have a right not to be offended.
You reading and understanding the Constitution would help the discussion. It is not out of date or expired. It is the law of the land, dont like it, please move. I will pay for your ticket.
Brian Pfleuger
Moderator Emeritus
Yes, there can. People who ignore the comments of the founders that provide context to the discussion of the intent of the COTUS. An intent that has not changed and should be the BASIS for any modern discussion of questions today.
Brian Pfleuger
Moderator Emeritus
Jae,
I definitely know what you mean. Unfortunately, many people today think the BOR is the Constitution and completely miss the fact that those rights were simply modifications to the original document.
Peetza (without anchovies)
WINSTON THE WOLF
Moderator
Minor loss to you maybe. It also seems like the Constitution and the Bill of Rights mean nothing to you either. Just like your comments mean nothing to me. Ask a service man what he thinks about the constitution. Just make sure to duck!!!
"To protect and defend the constitution of the United States of America"
Hello Gun forum..........duh
Your really reaching there...............Just say I am an anti and be done with it. The truth will set you free. As far as the 12 guys, Go ahead it is your right. But then again you read the first amendment as free speach means you can insult 12 guys "good luck with that" I don't see how one guy carrying a gun in public. Is insulting anybody. Or trying to over throw the goverment.
I'm draggin my feet back to the fire. The constitution is what this country is founded on but it only exists because we as people choose to let it exist. At one point in history slavery was protected by the constitution. Society found it offensive and banned slavery. There are times and places where openly carrying is acceptable and those where it is not. If you want to push it in peoples faces because you have a right to, see what happens come next election time. I have a right to drive my ATV during hunting season on forest service roads. Does that mean I go around blasting sirens and scarying all the wildlife. No it's not socially acceptable. The argument of "well we have to openly carry at all times because it's our right and we don't want to lose it" is not going to win over the hearts of the public. That will only put you in the minority and when you offend the majority things get amended.
- Status