While I don't support the NRA, I'll upvote because I'm not giving up my guns to some liberal racist from the city who knows NOTHING about guns or hunting.

Which is worse: 1) making an attempt to legislate a ban/tax on firearms of these kinds which puts it up to be legitimately 'shot down' (hehe) or 2) proclaiming yourself pro-NRA and having your police force take citizens' guns away anyway...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DgPR9I4KMNI

Seriously. I'm asking. Which is worse?

Anyone have the 2nd Amend rant from Boston Legal? it was pretty good.

>> ^joedirt:
Anyone have the 2nd Amend rant from Boston Legal? it was pretty good.


Is this the one?

Congressman Raymond Jacobs: May I ask, Denny, how do you feel about gun control?
Denny: For Communists.
Congressman Jacobs: What about banning assault weapons in the private sector?
Denny: As soon as you say it's OK to ban assault weapons, my friend, even in the private sector, you make it easier to take guns away from hunting, then personal protection. Soon the military and the police are without firearms.


Oh yeah, what this guy said:

|| || ||
|| || ||
\/ \/ \/

Good thing I have this thing called 'the internet':

http://www.ontheissues.org/domestic/Barack_Obama_Gun_Control.htm

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kBHkMADXnOw

I'm glad I don't live in a country where I have to worry about being shot.

*sighs* but I sure do feel I'm missing out on some great freedom!

The NRA has become an organization of clowns.

I'm a gun owner and a gun user, but let's stop this shit about assault rifles being a constitutional right.

They're no more a right than bazookas or hand grenades.

No bazookas or grenades? How do you hunt deer?

>> ^rougy: They're no more a right than bazookas or hand grenades.

I'm not big on guns personally, but the right to keep and bear arms is clearly to enable the populous to overthrow the government by force. We do have a constitutional right to bazookas and hand grenades, it's just not very popular/politic to say so.

Obama has mainly voted against gun Manufactures.

http://www.gunlawnews.org/Senators/Barack-Obama.html

However each bill is a story in it self. The cop killing bullet! Thanks god no criminals were trained on how to double tap, and finish with the head shot. </sarcasm>

He supported the ban in DC, and in Chicago.

I don't even want to talk about the laws that they broke in Katrina, let alone the constitution and the national guard in that church. In the event of a Disasters expect your rights to be taken away, even over your life.

I do not agree with the NRA, and I am not a hunter.

I would not like to be a law enforcement officer and have to be forced to take some ones 2nd amendment away from them, because I would expect them to shoot me.

>> ^dgandhi:
>> ^rougy: They're no more a right than bazookas or hand grenades.
I'm not big on guns personally, but the right to keep and bear arms is clearly to enable the populous to overthrow the government by force. We do have a constitutional right to bazookas and hand grenades, it's just not very popular/politic to say so.


I'm sorry, but that's just not realistic.

You pull out your bazooka, they bring out their tanks and helicopters.

You toss your hand grenade, and they'll drop their bunker buster.

It's nothing short of romaniticism to think that we can overthrow our government by those means.

Moving this video to quantumushroom's personal queue. It failed to receive enough votes to get sifted up to the front page within 2 days.

>> ^shuac:
Which is worse: 1) making an attempt to legislate a ban/tax on firearms of these kinds which puts it up to be legitimately 'shot down' (hehe) or 2) proclaiming yourself pro-NRA and having your police force take citizens' guns away anyway...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DgPR9I4KMNI
Seriously. I'm asking. Which is worse?


Well, the NRA actually took that to court and got all the firearms returned. They're also currently fighting in DC over making sure the government follows through after the ban was overturned. So, in the end, the NRA still prevailed.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081008/ap_on_re_us/katrina_confiscated_guns
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27087738/

>> ^rougy: It's nothing short of romaniticism to think that we can overthrow our government by those means.

Thanks to our WWII+ technology it's much cheaper to exterminate people then to govern them. While this does creates a situation the framers did not have to consider, it raises the question of whether the right to bare arms is still relevant if it does not constitute a check on government violence.

Guerrilla warfare is still absurdly effective, all our fancy tech still doesn't change the fact that well placed bullets kill people. I think you underestimate the toll that a dedicated revolutionary force can take on any government, especially in a civil war where "collateral damage" has high political cost for the government. The government can't really throw bunker busters into downtown Manhattan if they expect society to keep functioning.

*dead

This published video has been declared non-functional; embed code must be fixed within 2 days or it will be sent to the dead pool - declared dead by Constitutional_Patriot.

Awarding Haldaug with one Power Point for fixing this video's dead embed code.