One wonders what such a person might think if (say) we decided Islam was a dangerous religion, given their propensity to strap on bombs and blow up people and things. I see that freedom of religion is just as much a right as freedom to bear arms, surely we could require mandatory background checks and registration for those wishing to practice Islam.
Knockout "Game" Not New, Media Cover Up Not Either
- Thread starter AAAintheBeltway
- Start date
One wonders what such a person might think if (say) we decided Islam was a dangerous religion, given their propensity to strap on bombs and blow up people and things. I see that freedom of religion is just as much a right as freedom to bear arms, surely we could require mandatory background checks and registration for those wishing to practice Islam.
Whoa! Too much logic for Lefties.
Lol! Wheel barrow should be melting down after that one. Lol!
And can you imagine if the above actually happened?:eek: talk about WWIII! We're gun owners, and look at what we've ALLOWED to be done to our Constitutional rights that shall not be infringed! This alone should show what a peaceful people we gun owner are/have been during the last close to 100yrs as OUR Constitution has been decimated.
A background check is not an infringement of the 2nd amendment and now one here has put forth an intelligent argument against this. Showing a government issued ID to vote is a very similar situation yet all against ID's to purchase a gun are for ID's to vote. Hypocritical, illogical and dense thinking of the far right as usual.
Not a very good example but I get your point and it's valid. A more realistic situation would be extreme Muslim leaders and groups with violent talk and suspected terroristic actions be watched and spied on. And we're probably doing that now which is good. I have no problem with that.
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.
in·fringe (n-frnj)
v. in·fringed, in·fring·ing, in·fring·es
v.tr.
1. To transgress or exceed the limits of; violate: infringe a contract; infringe a patent.
2. Obsolete To defeat; invalidate.
Section 1. The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.
Section 2. The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.
a·bridge
əˈbrij/
verb
past tense: abridged; past participle: abridged
2.Law
curtail (rights or privileges).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Constitution and it's amendments allow congress to regulate voting, so long as they don't keep you from voting. Conversely the Constitution does not allow for infringements on our right to bear arms.
It's not that an intelligent argument hasn't been made. It's that you're not intelligent enough to get it.
I know you missed my point. "Watched and spied upon" !=background checks and registrations. Would you be wiling to settle for infringement of right to bear arms to be limited to being watched and spied upon?
For the record, I agree that we should not hand out guns willy nilly. And I also agree that folks should be free to pray to the sky fairy of their choice. My argument in this discussion is US Constitutional Law. It's pretty straight forward - well `till you get to some of the later amendments, sheesh. But once we decide to abandon process, we've tossed it all out the window. Once we decide "Oh, that part of the document is dumb and we can ignore it" is the moment that any tyrant can decide "Oh that whole document is dumb, let's ignore it all!"
But back to my point. Imams licenses to preach, surely that is not an infringement? Wanna buy a prayer rug, a Koran? Got your license to purchase? Or are freedom to bear arms too much infringed?
EDIT: And I also agree that if various background checks and such were not in place (which IMO would require a constitutional amendment to adopt) then watching folks who bought guns would be appropriate, even a necessary part of police duty. Many would be harmless, but some. . . Anyway, still rather see background checks and such from a legal, constitutional amendment. Guess I don't see watching as an infringement. And that includes anything. Watching me because I alluded to sky fairy - knock yourself out. Watching and spying does not seem to limit rights, IMO.
Is there a racial war against Whites?
Blacks committed 57 percent of all the violent crime against whites, while whites committed only 2 percent of the violent crime against blacks, according to the Department of Justiceâs annual Victimization Report.
At least since 1997 blacks have raped several thousand white women every year, while white-on-black rapes have numbered between â0.0″ and âSample based on 10 or fewer.â
According to the FBI, between 1976 and 2005, blacks, who are about 12 percent of the population, committed 53 percent of all felony murders and 56 percent of non-felony murders. The Centers for Disease Control recently reported that young black men are 14 times more likely to commit murder than young white men.
http://www.humanevents.com/2013/12/04/liberals-talk-race-and-crime-and-hilarity-ensues/
Blacks committed 57 percent of all the violent crime against whites, while whites committed only 2 percent of the violent crime against blacks, according to the Department of Justiceâs annual Victimization Report.
At least since 1997 blacks have raped several thousand white women every year, while white-on-black rapes have numbered between â0.0″ and âSample based on 10 or fewer.â
According to the FBI, between 1976 and 2005, blacks, who are about 12 percent of the population, committed 53 percent of all felony murders and 56 percent of non-felony murders. The Centers for Disease Control recently reported that young black men are 14 times more likely to commit murder than young white men.
http://www.humanevents.com/2013/12/04/liberals-talk-race-and-crime-and-hilarity-ensues/