View Poll Results: Would this compromise be acceptable?

Voters
93. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes. This isnít perfect, but no compromise is.

    12 12.90%
  • No. I donít mind some compromise, but this still takes away too much.

    13 13.98%
  • No. We should never compromise our gun rights.

    61 65.59%
  • No. This still gives too many gun ownership privileges.

    4 4.30%
  • I can hit a target 400 yards away with my eyes closed.

    3 3.23%
Page 29 of 71 FirstFirst ... 19272829303139 ... LastLast
Results 281 to 290 of 705

Thread: A proposed compromise on "assault weapons"

  1. #281
    warrior of the wetlands
    TurtleDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Ohio
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:40 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    180,561

    Re: A proposed compromise on "assault weapons"

    Quote Originally Posted by haymarket View Post
    No class of arms is any more protected than any other. No specific model or usage of firearm is specially protected more than any other.

    really-so why don't you tell us what sort of infringements you think are allowed. I am glad that you and I agree-a browning over and under shotgun and a Beretta AR 70 select fire true assault rifle should be treated the same.

    somehow though, I believe that you think the government has the power to pretty much ban anything while I don't think the federal government has any proper power to regulate either except perhaps as to import duties since both are made in Europe

  2. #282
    Sage
    Ikari's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 01:05 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    54,124

    Re: A proposed compromise on "assault weapons"

    Quote Originally Posted by TurtleDude View Post
    really-so why don't you tell us what sort of infringements you think are allowed.
    According to him, so long as you're afforded a bullet, a nail, and hammer; your right to keep and bear arms has not been infringed upon.
    You know the time is right to take control, we gotta take offense against the status quo

    Quote Originally Posted by A. de Tocqueville
    "I should have loved freedom, I believe, at all times, but in the time in which we live I am ready to worship it."

  3. #283
    warrior of the wetlands
    TurtleDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Ohio
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:40 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    180,561

    Re: A proposed compromise on "assault weapons"

    Quote Originally Posted by haymarket View Post
    What you want to do in the way of your own personal expectations is your business. You simply have no RIGHT to have that same level of weaponry however.
    well see that is interesting-in your post above this one I quoted you said all firearms have the same level of protection and now you claim that individual citizens do not have the right to own the same stuff police use

    which means you don't believe civilians have the right to own any firearm essentially since you have admitted each is protected at the same level


    or what you mean is that the second amendment does not apply to individuals which probably is how you can claim to be a big supporter of the amendment-you merely interpret it not to apply to the vast majority of the citizens in the USA

  4. #284
    warrior of the wetlands
    TurtleDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Ohio
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:40 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    180,561

    Re: A proposed compromise on "assault weapons"

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    According to him, so long as you're afforded a bullet, a nail, and hammer; your right to keep and bear arms has not been infringed upon.
    well I think I just proved what he really believes. his two posts I have just immediately prior to this post quoted demonstrates that

    1) all firearms have the same level of 2nd Amendment protection
    2) that most civilians do NOT have the right to own the same weapons CIVILIAN police do

    3) Ergo-the second amendment does not protect individual civilians at all no matter what type of gun they want to own

    that is the only possible way to find consistency in his two posts combined with his many claims that he supports "the second amendment"

    However, his interpretation of the second amendment is contrary to what 70% of the Public believes and that of which almost every constitutional scholar and 5 of the current USSC justices believe

  5. #285
    Sage
    Ikari's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 01:05 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    54,124

    Re: A proposed compromise on "assault weapons"

    Quote Originally Posted by TurtleDude View Post
    well I think I just proved what he really believes. his two posts I have just immediately prior to this post quoted demonstrates that

    1) all firearms have the same level of 2nd Amendment protection
    2) that most civilians do NOT have the right to own the same weapons CIVILIAN police do

    3) Ergo-the second amendment does not protect individual civilians at all no matter what type of gun they want to own

    that is the only possible way to find consistency in his two posts combined with his many claims that he supports "the second amendment"

    However, his interpretation of the second amendment is contrary to what 70% of the Public believes and that of which almost every constitutional scholar and 5 of the current USSC justices believe
    None of which is logical. His positions are created on his own invented definitions and delusions, nothing rooted in the Constitution nor in rational argument. Cops have guns, that means you can't! Seriously...what sort of argument is that? Ridiculous, as if my rights, my innate and inalienable rights, are augmented by the existence of the police. Absurd.
    You know the time is right to take control, we gotta take offense against the status quo

    Quote Originally Posted by A. de Tocqueville
    "I should have loved freedom, I believe, at all times, but in the time in which we live I am ready to worship it."

  6. #286
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Last Seen
    01-27-15 @ 11:37 AM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    8,247

    Re: A proposed compromise on "assault weapons"

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    According to him, so long as you're afforded a bullet, a nail, and hammer; your right to keep and bear arms has not been infringed upon.
    Or a sword.

  7. #287
    warrior of the wetlands
    TurtleDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Ohio
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:40 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    180,561

    Re: A proposed compromise on "assault weapons"

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    None of which is logical. His positions are created on his own invented definitions and delusions, nothing rooted in the Constitution nor in rational argument. Cops have guns, that means you can't! Seriously...what sort of argument is that? Ridiculous, as if my rights, my innate and inalienable rights, are augmented by the existence of the police. Absurd.
    at least 4-5 people a day ask me what the limits should be as to what us civilians can own and I always say

    AT LEAST the same stuff civilian cops are allowed to use. after we get to that place we can debate belt fed machine guns, automatic grenade launchers and a STRELA

  8. #288
    Sage
    Ikari's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 01:05 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    54,124

    Re: A proposed compromise on "assault weapons"

    Quote Originally Posted by Federalist View Post
    Or a sword.
    Exactly. Police have guns so if we're restricted to swords our right to keep and bear arms has not been infringed upon. I have absolutely no idea what sort of delusion and paranoia can lead one to such illogical conclusions.
    You know the time is right to take control, we gotta take offense against the status quo

    Quote Originally Posted by A. de Tocqueville
    "I should have loved freedom, I believe, at all times, but in the time in which we live I am ready to worship it."

  9. #289
    Sage
    lizzie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    between two worlds
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    28,581

    Re: A proposed compromise on "assault weapons"

    Quote Originally Posted by Federalist View Post
    Or a sword.
    Would my Est-wing hand axe count?
    "God is the name by which I designate all things which cross my path violently and recklessly, all things which alter my plans and intentions, and change the course of my life, for better or for worse."
    -C G Jung

  10. #290
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Last Seen
    01-27-15 @ 11:37 AM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    8,247

    Re: A proposed compromise on "assault weapons"

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    Exactly. Police have guns so if we're restricted to swords our right to keep and bear arms has not been infringed upon. I have absolutely no idea what sort of delusion and paranoia can lead one to such illogical conclusions.
    Authoritarians say the darndest things...when they are stamping on your face with their boot.

Page 29 of 71 FirstFirst ... 19272829303139 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •