The Same old.

[GambJoe]

First off I have my own opinion of the 2nd amendment. The problem right now is that the anti's believe they can and should get rid of it and the pro's that think that the anti's have the power to do so.

So here is my proposal. Start the process to amend the constitution. Let the people decide. Have all the pro's and anti's that get their names in news when ever a shooting occurs, stand down, and push it thru the legislature and get it to the states where the people can decide. I doubt there's a state in the union that will come up 2/3 vote to get rid of it.

Let's vote on it.

 

[mrvco]

Of course not, that's why the Antis aren't bothering with the constitutional amendment approach.

 

[M-Cameron]

Ummm..... No.

You do realize that by 'voting on it'.... There is always the possibility the vote may not go the way you want....

 

[GambJoe]

Ummm..... No.

You do realize that by 'voting on it'.... There is always the possibility the vote may not go the way you want....

That is one of the most frightening thing's I ever read in this forum. You are showing a lack of faith in the processes set forth in the constitution you doubt democracy. That's what votes are about. Some people win some people lose.

Not only am I confident the constitution would go unchanged and am willing to risk it.

 

[inclinebench]

I just feel that we shouldn't mess with the constitution just to prove a point.

 

[bannockburn]

GambJoe

I think we should leave the Constitution, and specifically the Second Amendment, exactly as it is. There is more than enough evidence to show that our Founding Fathers knew exactly what they were doing when they crafted this important amendment.

And what exactly are we gaining in gambling with the Second Amendment? It already exists; why would you want to take a chance on having the anti-gunners, the politicians, and the liberal media distort the issue to such an extent that the American people might actually vote against keeping the Second Amendment? With your proposal we essentially have everything to lose and nothing to gain. This is a bad bet all the way around.

Maybe you're willing to gamble with your Constitutional rights but I am not. I vote No to your proposal.

 

[M-Cameron]

That is one of the most frightening thing's I ever read in this forum. You are showing a lack of faith in the processes set forth in the constitution you doubt democracy. That's what votes are about. Some people win some people lose.

Not only am I confident the constitution would go unchanged and am willing to risk it.

I think you forget how easily influenced people can be......

There are a lot of fence sitters out there, all it woul take is one "random" mass shooting to occur before the vote.... And have media chalk it up to be the greatest tragedy ever to cause a lot of people to vote against the 2A....

Hell most ofthe influence for or against guns in the past was from those who are dedicated....... If you ask every Tom, dick and Jane to cast their vote.... You may not like the answer.

You are talking about the same people who voted for Obama.... Twice.

Forgive me for not wanting to put my god given rights in their hands.

 

[GambJoe]

Where do see a chance of the amendment being changed or ended? You think the assault weapons ban ever stood the a chance?

I been hearing the same arguments for to long. It takes up to much of our government's time which should be doing other things.

Most importantly this issue is keeping our country divided like none other. Why be scarred of losing when we're holding all the cards?

 

[M-Cameron]

Most importantly this issue is keeping our country divided like none other. Why be scarred of losing when we're holding all the cards?

You may have all the cards..... But what about the guy at the end of the table with the ace up his sleeve...

Politicians lie, cheat, and steal to further their agenda.....you think they wouldn't try to stretch the numbers a bit if it meant doing away with the 2A for good.

Hell, I bet some antis would kill( literally) if it meant they could be rid if the 2A for good.

Quite frankly, the 2A is the only thing that ensures out freedom, I'm not willing to risk it on the popular vote.

Honestly, what you stand to lose FAR outweighs what you stand to gain.

 

[ljnowell]

That is one of the most frightening thing's I ever read in this forum. You are showing a lack of faith in the processes set forth in the constitution you doubt democracy. That's what votes are about. Some people win some people lose.

Not only am I confident the constitution would go unchanged and am willing to risk it

You seem to be operating under the belief that America is a democracy. Its not.

Where do see a chance of the amendment being changed or ended? You think the assault weapons ban ever stood the a chance?

I been hearing the same arguments for to long. It takes up to much of our government's time which should be doing other things.

Most importantly this issue is keeping our country divided like none other. Why be scarred of losing when we're holding all the cards?

It sure as heck stood a chance from 1994-2004 when it was the law of the land! We are simply one house of congress away from it happening again, this time without a sunset clause.

 

[SabbathWolf]

.....and to the REPUBLIC for which it stands.....

 

[Cosmoline]

I'm not sure that the Bill of Rights actually is subject to amendment. Could the majority eliminate freedom of expression? Freedom of worship? At some point the amendment undermines the original contract to such an extent that it is a breach of that covenant.

you doubt democracy

So did the Founders. That's why there are so many procedural safeguards and Constitutional limits on the power of the majority.

 

[bobmcd]

I'm not sure that the Bill of Rights actually is subject to amendment.

Most assuredly they are. The first ten amendments are no different from the others. Among the others, the 18th was repealed by the 21st.

That being said, I certainly HOPE they never are.

 

[Fremmer]

We don't need to vote on repealing the 2nd amendment. No thank you.

See, they already had a vote. Several votes. Gun control failed. Nobody wants to "compromise" our 2nd amendment rights away. Even the Democrats hate it, which is why it failed in the senate.

 

[slidemuzik]

Gambjoe>Where do see a chance of the amendment being changed or ended? You think the assault weapons ban ever stood the a chance?

I been hearing the same arguments for to long. It takes up to much of our government's time which should be doing other things.

Most importantly this issue is keeping our country divided like none other. Why be scarred of losing when we're holding all the cards?


Joe do you think if we put it to a vote and won, that the anti-gun crowd would just go away??? There is zero to be gained by putting our existing rights at risk. ZERO.

You want compromise? Fine. Here's compromise. We'll give the anti gun people TRULY universal background checks in exchange for dropping the current system in place. EVERY single person in this country gets an NICS background check when they apply for a driver's license or personal ID.
NO EXCEPTIONS. If you pass, you get a designation on the ID. No pass, no designation. If you violate the law and become ineligible you immediately turn in your ID and are reissued one without the designation. Get caught with a fake or fail to turn in your ID after losing your right... mandatory jail sentence. Sell to an ineligible person or make a straw purchase and you both serve a mandatory sentence. Have an appeal process to handle errors.

If the stated purpose is simply to have everyone pass a background check before buying a gun this would accomplish that goal. What it does not do is create a defacto registration which IS what the current system does.

Would this keep guns out of the hands of criminals? Of course not. Nothing will. Criminals don't obey the law. That's why they are criminals. What it might do is smoke out the anti gun crowd for what they really want, registration and eventual disarming of the American public. Wake up man. Your proposal only demonstrates a fundamental misunderstanding of who we are up against and what they really want. Furthermore ideas like this don't make us look any more caring or thoughtful, they only make us look foolish. Enough already.

 

[GoWolfpack]

I'm gravely concerned that if the 2nd amendment were re-worded to more clearly reflect the founders actual intent it wouldn't pass a popular vote. The true intent of the 2A frightens a lot of people.

 

[cambeul41]

You think the assault weapons ban ever stood the a chance?

We had one once, didn't we?

 

[Warp]

That is one of the most frightening thing's I ever read in this forum. You are showing a lack of faith in the processes set forth in the constitution you doubt democracy. That's what votes are about. Some people win some people lose.

Not only am I confident the constitution would go unchanged and am willing to risk it.

We aren't a democracy.

We are a Republic.

And the Right to arms does not come from the Constitution. It is a natural Right, that happens to be protected from infringement by the Constitution. People have that Right regardless of whether or not men with power (aka governments) deny it.

 

[Fremmer]

NO. No compromises! No more votes! No new gun control!!!

 

[GambJoe]

We aren't a democracy.

We are a Republic

No we are a democratic republic that has been divided by an even bigger lobby then the NRA.

We had one once, didn't we?

Yet I could buy a new AR in NJ during the previous ban (sans grenade launcher). Besides we adapted pretty well. Once again I'm against a ban but this connection between the constitution and AR's hasn't been around for long. We were a free country before the 80's right, before Rambo unloaded a machine gun into to the roof of Hollywood tent and Mel Gibson looked good carrying a 92F and some foreigner took over Fox news.

 

[2A Citizen]

Let's vote on it.

No, lets not. As someone or several pointed out; Nothing, to be gained.

 

[BigBore44]

Agreed. A vote will change nothing. We ALREADY have the Right. So we vote once and it passes. How long before we have to vote again? How many times will we have to vote? How about we vote for term limits, and to get lobbyist out of Washington. Remember as one poster above said, Obama got elected....TWICE!!

 

[we are not amused]

.

"...You doubt democracy"
So did the Founders. That's why there are so many procedural safeguards and Constitutional limits on the power of the majority.

That is a very important point that most people seem to not understand.:banghead:

I cheer the fact that it is hard to get something done in Congress, that means the system is working as designed.

People, read the Founders own debates on forming the Constitution. They feared a tyranny of the majority!

And by the way, Warp is absolutely right about our Natural Rights.

As is GoWolfpack. Freedom is a scary thing, and a lot of people fear it.

 

[rugerman]

So you want a vote. A vote that will be overseen by the current administration. The administration that oked fast & furious, the administration who screw up Bengazi and let the people who killed our people still roam the earth. The administration that was so lax that it let the Boston bombers who they had been warned about do their deed then read them their rights before we could get all the information out of them. The administration that calls the killing of american service men & women by a radical muslum work place violence. The administration that is headed by a liar that said that universal health care would be cheeper and you could keep your plan and your doctor but wouldn't let is read it before it was rammed down our throats (can't read it til its passed).
The administration that is hell bent on gun control and will use anything to further that agenda. Sure lets trust them, I'm sure that we'll get a fair & balanced shake and there won't be any political tricks played, no body will get to vote more that once and only LEGAL LIVING registered voters will be allowed to vote. I think that I'll pass!!!!!!!!!!

 

[MICHAEL T]

Its not about keeping guns out of hands of criminals . These people don't want citizens to have guns period . Only police and military need them That what they say over and over.

I got results of a poll yesterday We won on back ground checks and most every thing except 1 question. Should the Government Ban semi auto guns 77% said yes Automatic is the word Don't matter if semi or full auto People and many gun owners see these as machine guns. Gun Control act of 1968 got the sporting BS put in it and we been fighting that line ever since. Johnson wanted complete gun control . Best he got was the 1968 act and that was to much.