You can't have a discussion with these people. They don't argue the issues. They can't argue the issues. They can only go off half cocked (no pun intended) with emotionalism and toss out red herrrings. They are a fringe element. Leave them alone piezoe, you are wasting your time. Let them exist in a closed loop.
After the election: MARK LEVIN: We conservatives, we do not accept bipartisanship in the pursuit of tyranny. Period. We will not negotiate the terms of our economic and political servitude. Period. We will not abandon our child to a dark and bleak future. We will not accept a fate that is alien to the legacy we inherited from every single future generation in this country. We will not accept social engineering by politicians and bureaucrats who treat us like lab rats, rather than self-sufficient human beings. There are those in this country who choose tyranny over liberty. They do not speak for us, 57 million of us who voted against this yesterday, and they do not get to dictate to us under our Constitution.
The only emotional posts in this thread seem to be yours. The bottom line is that we don't trust you liberals to monkey with the constitution and your interpretations of it are just that, your interpretations. I'll let the SCOTUS interpret the constitution and I'll live with those outcomes even if I don't like them.
If that's your view, you haven't bothered to read the posts, not surprisingly. And I did not offer ANY interpretation of the Consitution or the 2nd Amendment. I commented on the political thinking the gave birth to the 2nd amendment. I am quite certain you will live will the SCOTUS judgements, all of them. Your friends have vowed not to though. Did you read the prior post? That guy quoted Mark Levin saying how he would not accept a "bipartisan tyranny", whatever that is, as a result of the 2012 elections. Think they'll accept a "tyranny" of 9, nay, 5 persons in robes? You think those who you brand as "liberal" are more dangerous to the Constitution than those screaming for an uprising against an imagined tyranny? That's why I say you guys are completely unreasonable. You take each other's backs no matter how loony others view are so long as they aren't "liberal". ET Liberal: "AGW is a real threat!" ET Conservative 1: "I am writing from prison where I am doing life. Just wanted to say I think AGW is the biggest hoax ever perpetrated on humankind. It's the Liberals who pose the greatest threat to humanity, not greenhouse gasses, AND WE ALL KNOW THATS TRUE!" ET Conservative 2: "I agree totally with my good brother ET Conservative 1"
The tyranny being referred to is the executive branch issuing forth a decree declaring entire classes of weapons to be banned and then ordering the DOJ to enforce that decree even though it will not have been passed through congress or be ruled upon by SCOTUS. You are mixing and cross-applying statements in order to twist their meaning to better fit your agenda which happens to be an extreme liberal agenda. In particular the concern is an outright ban on semi-automatic weapons with a possible retroactive application that would make huge numbers of weapons already under private ownership illegal. Its the executive that is rapidly becoming dictatorial. Nobody has challenged the SCOTUS and it has not been petitioned to rule on anything yet. Suggesting that I'm not reading posts carefully or that people here are completely unreasonable isn't a huge surprise. You are outraged that others do not defer to your superior intellect and advanced moral outlook and so you must rationalize the almost universal response to your posts here in P&R as being a bunch of rednecks in cahoots. Your racial analogies are offensive and I doubt that you believe them yourself.
Try reading it again. Maybe you'll get it the second time. Here's a good example in real life terms. A FUCKING MADMAN KILLED A BUNCH OF PEOPLE AND YOU WANT TO RESTRICT FREEDOMS BECAUSE OF IT. NON NEGOTIABLE. There is no need for discussion on this issue. The left has created an issue from a crime, and now cries about those of us who don't want to negotiate away more freedoms because of the act of a criminal.
Average number of people in the US killed in mass shootings (4 or more victims per FBI stats) each year -- approximately 150. ----------------------------------------------- Average number of people killed by drunk drivers each year: Approximately 10,000 -- You're 67 times more likely to be killed by a drunk driver than you are to be a victim of a mass murder. ------------------------------------------------- Average number of people struck by lightning each year in the US: approximately 400. -- You're 2.6 times more likely to be struck by lightning than you are to be a victim of mass murder. ---------------------------------------- Average number of people who win a lottery worth million dollars or more each year in the US: approximately 1,600. -- You're over 10 times as likely to win a million dollars or more in a lottery than you are to be a victim of mass murder.