• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

The myth that civilian gun ownership prevents tyranny

Why didn't you know of Helvering if you aced con law?

TurtleDude said:
you just failed constitutional law 101. that proves to me you really have no understanding of either the fact that the general welfare clause is based on a power to tax and you don't get the fact that the federal government was supposed to be substantially limited in its powers
Click to expand...

I aced con law. Shame on you. Civility is a must.

WHY DIDN'T YOU KNOW ABOUT HELVERING?

"Shortly after Butler, in Helvering v. Davis,[24] the Supreme Court interpreted the clause even more expansively, disavowing almost entirely any role for judicial review of Congressional spending policies, thereby conferring upon Congress a plenary power to impose taxes and to spend money for the general welfare subject almost entirely to Congress's own discretion. Even more recently, in South Dakota v. Dole[25] the Court held Congress possessed power to indirectly influence the states into adopting national standards by withholding, to a limited extent, federal funds. To date, the Hamiltonian view of the General Welfare Clause predominates in case law."

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_welfare_clause
 
Last edited:
Re: Why didn't you know of Helvering if you aced con law?

Howard the Duck said:
I aced con law. Shame on you. Civility is a must.

WHY DIDN'T YOU KNOW ABOUT HELVERING?

"Shortly after Butler, in Helvering v. Davis,[24] the Supreme Court interpreted the clause even more expansively, disavowing almost entirely any role for judicial review of Congressional spending policies, thereby conferring upon Congress a plenary power to impose taxes and to spend money for the general welfare subject almost entirely to Congress's own discretion. Even more recently, in South Dakota v. Dole[25] the Court held Congress possessed power to indirectly influence the states into adopting national standards by withholding, to a limited extent, federal funds. To date, the Hamiltonian view of the General Welfare Clause predominates in case law."

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_welfare_clause
Click to expand...

LOL I suspect it wasn't at Yale Law
if the general welfare clause permitted gun control despite the tenth and second amendments, why hasn't it ever been cited for that purpose


do you honestly believe the founders intended the federal government to have gun control powers when it comes to what private citizens can own? what other powers were given to the federal government that gave it power over private citizens acting within one of the several states?
 
Howard the Duck said:
Nah. You are harmless.

How about addressing the thread topic?
Click to expand...

Harmless? LOL. but the fact remains, 100 million armed Americans-at least 20 million of them competent shooters, is a force that is more than enough to destroy any domestic army
 
Howard the Duck said:
Do high rates of gun ownership protect democracies? Data points to a resounding no.

This duck is looking forward to hearing your opinions on this interesting article. I question what I view as self serving gop/nra talking points on this matter.

https://thinkprogress.org/civilian-guns-do-not-prevent-tyranny-f831c6aa871c/

"There is, of course, a clear link between the Second Amendment and freedom, insofar as it permits freedoms for individuals to purchase and bear arms in the United States. As Pew found last year, some three-quarters of gun owners say the right to civilian gun ownership is “essential” to “their own personal sense of freedom.”

But is the right to civilian gun ownership also essential to the prevention of tyranny? Is it a key ingredient to the preservation, implementation, and extension of democracy?

The short answer: No. Data compiled by ThinkProgress from the past decade shows no correlation between civilian gun ownership rates and democracy — or low civilian gun ownership rates and the rise of a tyrannical government."
Click to expand...

Your thoughts?
 
Fraggle Rock said:
They need to think their itty bitty gun is what is saving them from total anarchy. It gives them something to hold in their hand. Because their tiny weeny can be held by a pair of tweezers.
Click to expand...

Ah, yes, Markley's law, the refuge of anti-gunners that have run out of convincing arguments. I am always encouraged to see it invoked, since shows the unconvinced public at large just how bereft of ideas the anti-gunners actually are.

https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Markley's Law
 
Kal'Stang said:
It's ThinkProgress, a site that has a decidedly biased view on guns. And it sure as heck isn't FOR them. Whatever info they've got its going to be a one sided view. For instance, I didn't see anywhere in that article that shows were the government disarmed its citizens prior to losing freedoms. (in fact the word "disarm" isn't even mentioned ONCE in the entire article).

So no, not interesting in the slightest. Just propaganda.
Click to expand...

Agreed, strongly.

ThinkProgress is the same gang of idiots defending the White Helmets, and it is connected to the Clinton Cabal.
 
lefty louie said:
Well being the USA is not a democracy this question doesn't pertain to me.
Click to expand...

The US must be on a short-list of say five of the most democratic countries on Earth. You are sadly misinformed. Go on: try to list a few states that are more democratic than the US
 
Casper said:
A Republic is a form of Democratic govrnment. You know that, right?
Click to expand...

Yes, but "a democracy" is one very specific form of democratic government. The post you responded to said "Well being the USA is not a democracy this question doesn't pertain to me."
 
Sweden said:
The US must be on a short-list of say five of the most democratic countries on Earth. You are sadly misinformed. Go on: try to list a few states that are more democratic than the US
Click to expand...

"And to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all." Who among us are sadly misinformed?
 
Casper said:
A Republic is a form of Democratic govrnment. You know that, right?
Click to expand...

But the republic gave us Trump and not Clinton which would not have happened in a pure democracy, you know that right???
 
lefty louie said:
But the republic gave us Trump and not Clinton which would not have happened in a pure democracy, you know that right???
Click to expand...

Yes, but we are not a true Democracey, no country since ancient Greece has been. I wanted None of the Above to win.
 
Rucker61 said:
The US is not a democracy. It's a representative republic. It's also 21 on this list.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_Index
Click to expand...

So you pray in aid a rigged poll by the Economist Intelligence Unit. That's the same Economist that this very week had such kind words to say about that well-known enemy of democracy Karl Marx on the two hundredth anniversary of his birth.

The Economist places Sweden second on their stupid and highly misleading list. In Sweden we suffer from a yawning gulf between a narrow political/media elite and the people. Democracy is barely alive.
 
Kal'Stang said:
It's ThinkProgress, a site that has a decidedly biased view on guns. And it sure as heck isn't FOR them. Whatever info they've got its going to be a one sided view. For instance, I didn't see anywhere in that article that shows were the government disarmed its citizens prior to losing freedoms. (in fact the word "disarm" isn't even mentioned ONCE in the entire article).

So no, not interesting in the slightest. Just propaganda.
Click to expand...

But you haven't proved the data to be wrong.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom