End Game: "It’s Time For Gun Abolition. We Need To Ban All Civilian Guns."

[roamer_1]

They can get government assistance /s

Wheeee! 

[RoosGirl]

It is fascinating to consider how similar the pro-gun and pro-abortion extremists are.   Here's INVAR breathlessly shouting "they're coming for our guns!" on the basis of some crank opinion in a Maine newspaper.   Just as the pro-abortionists are convinced the true goal of the pro-life movement isn't regulation but abolishment of the abortion right, so does the pro-gun crowd convince itself that reasonable regulation of firearms is just cover for the true goal of confiscation.

Why is this?    The answer's pretty clear to me.   As I've explained elsewhere,  the natural, individual right to self-defense (that is, outside the context of providing for the civilian militia) isn't protected by the Second Amendment,  but by a 5 - 4 Supreme Court decision.   The right to abortion is likewise not codified in the Constitution, but derives from the natural right of privacy as enunciated by a 5 - 4 Supreme Court decision.

In other words,  the right to abortion and the individual right to bear arms are both a product of the same "living Constitution" and just as fragile.   How many of us voted for Trump mainly because he promised to appoint conservative justices that, we hope, will overturn the right to abortion?   Well, the individual RKBA is just as susceptible to being lost on the decision of some future SCOTUS majority.   And the votes we - both right and left - cast for President are ground zero in ensuring the makeup of the courts that will secure the precious  rights we fear are most fragile. 

It is a situation that is fundmentally poisonous to our nation.   

The solution is to amend the Constitution to codify the individual RKBA.   Just as I've urged for years that the Constitution be amended to codify the right of privacy.   Whatever you may think of living Constitutions,  they have the perverse effect of polarizing our political culture.   For the left, it's all about saving abortion,  for the right, it's all about saving guns.  And so the red vs. blue divide deepens,  and folks like INVAR call for war.

That's bullshit.  The right to life, and therefore the protection of that life, is guaranteed by the "Laws of Nature and Nature's God".  Start codifying things and it allows the codification of someone's idea of what the acceptable limits of life and the protection of it should be.

[INVAR]

That's bullshit.  The right to life, and therefore the protection of that life, is guaranteed by the "Laws of Nature and Nature's God".  Start codifying things and it allows the codification of someone's idea of what the acceptable limits of life and the protection of it should be.

Notice that he spouts the same Communist Claptrap about a "living Constitution" that they do, while he continues to insist he is some kind of Conservative, when he is anything but a Commie-Lib Pinko based on everything he has written on this board.

He continues to assert enumerated Rights are simply government-granted privileges that can be *reasonably regulated* at the whim of he and his Leftist legal hordes - while he continues to insist that "Rights" borne out of the ether of 'penumbras and emanations' are inviolable and supreme.

Jazzy doesn't support life or liberty, he supports death and slavery to despotic wickedness that has its own morality based on whatever courts have to rule.  He argues the legality and necessity of despotism while spewing a neo-statist morality that compels you to surrender your liberty for the sake of 'equality, safety and fairness' in the "community".

[RoosGirl]

Notice that he spouts the same Communist Claptrap about a "living Constitution" that they do, while he continues to insist he is some kind of Conservative, when he is anything but a Commie-Lib Pinko based on everything he has written on this board.

He continues to assert enumerated Rights are simply government-granted privileges that can be *reasonably regulated* at the whim of he and his Leftist legal hordes - while he continues to insist that "Rights" borne out of the ether of 'penumbras and emanations' are inviolable and supreme.

Jazzy doesn't support life or liberty, he supports death and slavery to despotic wickedness that has its own morality based on whatever courts have to rule.  He argues the legality and necessity of despotism while spewing a neo-statist morality that compels you to surrender your liberty for the sake of 'equality, safety and fairness' in the "community".

I know exactly what he is.  I don't respond to him for him, I respond to him for anyone that might be reading and believing his nonsense is a conservative position.

[Jazzhead]

Notice that he spouts the same Communist Claptrap about a "living Constitution" that they do, ".

Be grateful for a "living Constitution" (and Justice Scalia).   It's what protects your individual RKBA.   No, not the Second Amendment, which under the view of strict Constitutional interpretation you favor, has nothing to do with the natural right of individual self defense.   

Scalia went out on a Constitutional limb to protect your RKBA, INVAR.  Be grateful to him - and mindful that your right hangs in the balance of a 5 -4 Court majority.   That's why I favor amending the Constitution to specifically codify the gun right as an individual right unrelated to any civilian militia.   

[INVAR]

I know exactly what he is.  I don't respond to him for him, I respond to him for anyone that might be reading and believing his nonsense is a conservative position.

Yes.  Hopefully few to none are that easily fooled.

That said, this is also why we love having Jazzy here as our resident Commie-Lib punching bag: It helps us sharpen the iron against what he and his Leftist comrades advocate.

[Jazzhead]

I know exactly what he is.  I don't respond to him for him, I respond to him for anyone that might be reading and believing his nonsense is a conservative position.

Your position on this particular issue is less conservative than mine is, certainly in the sense that Justice Thomas would define the term.   Thomas would look alone to the plain text of the 2A, including the predicate clause.  You can't wish away that damn predicate clause.   That's why it is important to amend the Constitution to ensure the RKBA is an individual right. 

[INVAR]

Be grateful for a "living Constitution" (and Justice Scalia).   It's what protects your individual RKBA.   

Scalia went out on a Constitutional limb to protect your RKBA, INVAR.  Be grateful to him - and mindful that your right hangs in the balance of a 5 -4 Court majority.   

Only a Statist imbecile whose god is government actually is stupid enough to believe that my rights to KBA is dependent upon what some Judge in black robes has to say or write.

My right to arms does not rest on the balance of a 5-4 court.  My right to arms rests in my arms - and my willingness to use them in defense against anyone or any entity intent on infringing upon my liberty.  SCOTUS could rule tomorrow that all civilian guns must be banned and confiscated and it will no more be respected or followed than if a serial killer busted down my door in the middle of the night and ordered the same.  Hiding behind black robes under the false color of law does not disguise tyranny.  It will be resisted as vociferously as the intruder is.

No one protects my rights but me.

[skeeter]

Only a Statist imbecile whose god is government actually is stupid enough to believe that my rights to KBA is dependent upon what some Judge in black robes has to say or write.

My right to arms does not rest on the balance of a 5-4 court.  My right to arms rests in my arms - and my willingness to use them in defense against anyone or any entity intent on infringing upon my liberty.  SCOTUS could rule tomorrow that all civilian guns must be banned and confiscated and it will no more be respected or followed than if a serial killer busted down my door in the middle of the night and ordered the same.  Hiding behind black robes under the false color of law does not disguise tyranny.  It will be resisted as vociferously as the intruder is.

No one protects my rights but me.

Most on this board understood perfectly well that our essential rights, as specifically spelled out in the Constitution, descend from our creator, and that the 2A exists for the express purpose of guaranteeing that no man, or court, take them away.

Anyone who doesn't understand this and base all of their policy positions from this axiom going forward is no conservative and shouldn't be bothered with. Unless you're bored and looking for something to do.

[Jazzhead]

Most on this board understood perfectly well that our essential rights, as specifically spelled out in the Constitution, descend from our creator, and that the 2A exists for the express purpose of guaranteeing that no man, or court, take them away.

So Justice Scalia isn't a conservative?   My views are similar to his, and I fully support the Heller decision.

Look, shove your head in the sand if you want.  But the 2A does not protect your individual right to bear arms in self defense.  The Heller decision does.   And that decision is as fragile as Roe v. Wade, because it based on similar principles of Constitutional interpretation.   It is fragile because the political left hates Heller and wants to elect a President who'll change the composition of the Court to overturn that decision. 

Look, insult me all you want - you're only displaying your own myopia.   The reality is that the individual RKBA hangs by a thread, and the number one priority of anyone who cares about the right should be to work for an amendment to the Constitution to codify the right's protection. 

[RoosGirl]

Your position on this particular issue is less conservative than mine is, certainly in the sense that Justice Thomas would define the term.   Thomas would look alone to the plain text of the 2A, including the predicate clause.  You can't wish away that damn predicate clause.   That's why it is important to amend the Constitution to ensure the RKBA is an individual right.

Do you think we give a flying bleep what some black robed judge, no matter what his name is, has to say about us being able to defend ourselves and our families?  Your position on some government appointee telling me what my freedoms are is in no way conservative; I don't know who you think you're trying to fool with your bullshit, but rest assured it will not be me.  My freedoms are spelled out in ink and those words do no and never have changed.

Let's just say I believe your theory that 2A is intended only to cover a gov't militia.  All that means is that individual ownership of firearms is not addressed in the Constitution and therefore making laws that prohibit ownership is not an enumerated power of FedGov.  It would be left to the individual States to establish gun laws.

[Jazzhead]

Only a Statist imbecile whose god is government actually is stupid enough to believe that my rights to KBA is dependent upon what some Judge in black robes has to say or write.

My right to arms does not rest on the balance of a 5-4 court.  My right to arms rests in my arms - and my willingness to use them in defense against anyone or any entity intent on infringing upon my liberty.  SCOTUS could rule tomorrow that all civilian guns must be banned and confiscated and it will no more be respected or followed than if a serial killer busted down my door in the middle of the night and ordered the same.  Hiding behind black robes under the false color of law does not disguise tyranny.  It will be resisted as vociferously as the intruder is.

No one protects my rights but me.

We live in a Constitutional Republic, not a tyranny.   If you choose to ignore the laws enacted by the peoples' elective representatives, then you have chosen to be a lawbreaker and to expose yourself to the community's police power.   If the firefight you lust for then ensues,  I trust you're right about your faith walk and will join your Maker.     

[txradioguy]

We live in a Constitutional Republic, not a tyranny.   If you choose to ignore the laws enacted by the peoples' elective representatives, then you have chosen to be a lawbreaker and to expose yourself to the community's police power.   

That is really rich coming from you.

[Jazzhead]

Let's just say I believe your theory that 2A is intended only to cover a gov't militia.  All that means is that individual ownership of firearms is not addressed in the Constitution and therefore making laws that prohibit ownership is not an enumerated power of FedGov.  It would be left to the individual States to establish gun laws.

Most gun laws are in fact established at the state level.

And would you obey those laws or offer armed resistance?   

[driftdiver]

That is really rich coming from you.

@txradioguy
Its amazing how selective some people are about the law.

[Cyber Liberty]

Most on this board understood perfectly well that our essential rights, as specifically spelled out in the Constitution, descend from our creator, and that the 2A exists for the express purpose of guaranteeing that no man, or court, take them away.

Anyone who doesn't understand this and base all of their policy positions from this axiom going forward is no conservative and shouldn't be bothered with. Unless you're bored and looking for something to do.

For Jazzy it's worse than that:  Our rights are not spelled out on parchment, it's whatever the courts say they are.  That will change daily.  I think of him as a "Judicial Supremacist."  The Constitution is irrelevant.  The Bible is irrelevant.  Statutes are irrelevant. The only thing that matters is what the highest Judge to rule on something has to say about it, and that only matters until it doesn't.

As for bothering with people, Jazz doesn't bother with me.  I'm no fun, I have his number.

[txradioguy]

@txradioguy
Its amazing how selective some people are about the law.

Yup.  He shifts his position based on whether the law passed by the people agrees with or is in direct contention with his particular Liberal position on any issue.

[edpc]

As for bothering with people, Jazz doesn't bother with me.  I'm no fun, I have his number.

Is it 867-5309?

[Cyber Liberty]

Is it 867-5309?

Yeah.  To his boyfriends he goes by the name, "Jenny."

[Jazzhead]

Yup.  He shifts his position based on whether the law passed by the people agrees with or is in direct contention with his particular Liberal position on any issue.

Example, please? 

[Jazzhead]

The Constitution is irrelevant. 

The Constitution is very relevant.  But the 2A, facially, doesn't protect the individual right.  How do you explain away the predicate clause, Mr. Strict Constructionist?   

[driftdiver]

Example, please?

@Jazzhead @txradioguy
Cake, gay marriage, abortion, gun control, immigration, taxation, probably several more but those are the first ones that come to mind.

[driftdiver]

The Constitution is very relevant.  But the 2A, facially, doesn't protect the individual right.  How do you explain away the predicate clause, Mr. Strict Constructionist?   

@Jazzhead   @Cyber Liberty
The intent of the 2A is clearly supported by the writings of the people that wrote it.   They stated their intent and belief that an armed populace was necessary for a free populace.

The Constitution doesn't give us the right, it protects it from Government interference.

[roamer_1]

We live in a Constitutional Republic, not a tyranny.   If you choose to ignore the laws enacted by the peoples' elective representatives, then you have chosen to be a lawbreaker and to expose yourself to the community's police power.   

Oh that is quite the other way around. Your 'community's police power' will be exposed to me... And 100m other fellers.

[Jazzhead]

The only thing that matters is what the highest Judge to rule on something has to say about it, and that only matters until it doesn't.

That's the problem with a living Constitution.  That's why the Constitution needs to be amended to specifically protect the individual right, so it isn't taken away when the Dems next take the Presidency and can appoint their folks to the SCOTUS.

  As for bothering with people, Jazz doesn't bother with me.  I'm no fun, I have his number.

     Like hell you do.