What are you driving at?
In the first place did you listen to the whole thing or just the part where -Obana wants to take our guns.
why is it the NRA and gun lobby uses so many scare tactics?
i feel sorry for those that believe some one is going to come and take guns away from people.my opinion some should be taken,but get real,i don't think that would ever happen in this country unless some Facist happens to be in control.
Obama's ACTUAL RECORD on gun control!
Ok for states & cities to determine local gun laws. (Apr 2008)
FactCheck: Yes, Obama endorsed Illinois handgun ban. (Apr 2008)
Respect 2nd Amendment, but local gun bans ok. (Feb 2008)
Provide some common-sense enforcement on gun licensing. (Jan 2008)
2000: cosponsored bill to limit purchases to 1 gun per month. (Oct 2007)
Concealed carry OK for retired police officers. (Aug 2007)
Stop unscrupulous gun dealers dumping guns in cities. (Jul 2007)
Keep guns out of inner cities--but also problem of morality. (Oct 2006)
Bush erred in failing to renew assault weapons ban. (Oct 2004)
Ban semi-automatics, and more possession restrictions. (Jul 1998)
Voted NO on prohibiting lawsuits against gun manufacturers. (Jul 2005)
bout like a fishing exposition isn't it?
The Second Amendment:
There are several versions of the text of the Second Amendment, each with slight capitalization and punctuation differences, found in the official documents surrounding the adoption of the Bill of Rights. One such version was passed by the Congress, which reads:
“ A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. ”
Another version is found in the copies distributed to the states, and then ratified by them, which had this capitalization and punctuation:
“ A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. "
From Wikipedia
**************************************** **************************************** ****
Now play that video again. I still don't feel my rights will be "infringed".
I don't know. Maybe it's just me. :-)
You know I actually like this bill, "Provide some common-sense enforcement on gun licensing. (Jan 2008)" . Although I can not say I am pro or anti gun laws, but the one thing I deeply believe is good gun control in which you actually hit your target with every shot, not maybe one out of 100.
It takes one well placed shot from a .22 rifle to kill anyone.
What is a lot of fun is to read everything one can about the history on how the Bill of Rights came to life, the 2nd Amendment is very important for many reasons and actually goes well beyond what people have tried to make it to be today. I just wish both sides would actually find out what was meant by that single line from the 2nd.
As president he may have a lot of pull, but anyone should also look at the number of bills introduced each year to change something within the Original Constitution of the United States and they would see and soon realize that with over 700 attempts to do any type of change within the last 5 years none has even made it for a vote in either the Senate or House of Representatives. So the odds of that ever happening are so vast does any one even recall the last attempt to add an amendment to the Constitution?
I do know since the repeal of the amendment to ban liquor was the last one that even passed through congress and make it for a vote by the states. And that was what year?
CNN has gotten lost since it was taken over. It is just as addled as Fox news. I've lost all respect for Lou Dobbs. There was a time when CNN did try to portray the news objectively, but that has gone by the way a long time ago.
I agree Ghostdancer...
Most neo-cons do not even know what the 2nd amendment actually says...nor do they care.
Several thoughts here....
1) Some see this as an infringement of rights, but the message (from what I heard) was that it's a registration not a prevention of someone's expression of the 2nd amendment. Using the same argument used in the pro-wiretapping camp, "if you're not doing anything wrong, why are you worrying about it?" It's just a registration....
2) I would agree with suea46 but also add that most people, regardless of their political stance, would be able to specifically drill down on what ANY of the amendments have to say about our rights. I'd also think that most people who enjoy using and owning guns are safe, law-abiding citizens who also take care in that ownership. Unfortunately, I think there is some vilification done by both sides to further personal and political agendas too.
3) Bentwingedangel also brings up a very important point with looking at a track record, rather than one sample of the data. Unfortunately, I think the trend is for people to pick out what data supports their argument rather than collect as much data as possible...and see what the big trend really is.
What frightens me more than any gun-toting nutjob is that many people draw their data from sources like Lou Dobbs...or Coulter...or Huffington...or whoever...and it's likely that it's one source (and likely one slant) to any topic presented. Most viewers/listeners are probably letting this info supplant any and all research they might have done....leaving us with masses of people who react based on what someone else feels rather than from any real information. Here is where media hype goes beyond annoying and can help make things socially flammable and dangerous.
DrewS says~~~
What frightens me more than any gun-toting nutjob is that many people draw their data from sources like Lou Dobbs...or Coulter...or Huffington...or whoever...and it's likely that it's one source (and likely one slant) to any topic presented. Most viewers/listeners are probably letting this info supplant any and all research they might have done....leaving us with masses of people who react based on what someone else feels rather than from any real information. Here is where media hype goes beyond annoying and can help make things socially flammable and dangerous. ~~~
Exactly! I see from your profile you joined EONS this past March. I will wager as time goes by you will be dismayed to see how many of us boomers, who should know better, do not know the difference between a blog or op ed piece and factual information.
For me it's worse than dismaying, it's fightening, but on another thread someone pointed out to me and this makes sense, we were raised by folks who came of age in the 40's and 50's and so learned intolerance of a bigoted nature at a very young age. We, the boomers, came of age really in the radical 60's and 70's so my point was we really should have learned.
Racism should have been left in the dust, as should intolerance.
The rampant paranoia I see on EONS is what puzzles me...
welcome back SW.
i agree 100%.
what does the second Amendment say? to who ?
the Constitution,that was ratified in 1791,at a time when this young nation started out and not having a real military power in the world till later on.
a lot of people do not realize at that period of time there was countries and leaders thruout the world was hoping this United States would run into trouble and they would come rushing in to help take control.
so in other words.the 2nd amendment is not going to be elimenated in the near future,so just hold on to your shorts.
