Active Users:525 Time:05/04/2025 01:34:58 PM
There can be NO negotiation, that is the point. This is a Constitutionally protected Right. HyogaRott Send a noteboard - 21/03/2013 01:03:54 PM

View original post
View original postHe who sacrifices freedom for security deserves neither. People willing to trade their freedom for temporary security deserve neither and will lose both.

Hence it is a bad idea to negotiate with the left for a gun compromise of any sort unless they are willing to offer us something of equal or greater value.


You want it changed, you have to change the Constitution.

Fienstein wants to ban all but 2,000 specific guns.

ANALOGIES
Freedom of Press: You can only read THESE 2000 books.
Freedom of Speech: You can only support THESE 2000 politicians.
Freedom of Assmebly: Only THESE 2000 organizations are allowed.
Freedom of the Press: Only THESE 2000 newspapers and websites.

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO

Freedom that is limited is NOT freedom.

Punish those who abuse there freedom and cause harm. Mourn those individuals who are harmed by those pathetic sickos. Try to prevent the sickos from harming folks. HOWEVER, we can not allow our freedoms to be restricted under the guise of "protecting us"

Now Hampshire said it best, Live free or die.



I do not know whether it is to yourself or Mr. Adams I am to give my thanks for the copy of the new constitution. I beg leave through you to place them where due. It will be yet three weeks before I shall receive them from America. There are very good articles in it: and very bad. I do not know which preponderate. What we have lately read in the history of Holland, in the chapter on the Stadtholder, would have sufficed to set me against a Chief magistrate eligible for a long duration, if I had ever been disposed towards one: and what we have always read of the elections of Polish kings should have forever excluded the idea of one continuable for life. Wonderful is the effect of impudent and persevering lying. The British ministry have so long hired their gazetteers to repeat and model into every form lies about our being in anarchy, that the world has at length believed them, the English nation has believed them, the ministers themselves have come to believe them, and what is more wonderful, we have believed them ourselves. Yet where does this anarchy exist? Where did it ever exist, except in the single instance of Massachusets? And can history produce an instance of a rebellion so honourably conducted? I say nothing of it's motives. They were founded in ignorance, not wickedness. God forbid we should ever be 20. years without such a rebellion.[1] The people can not be all, and always, well informed. The part which is wrong will be discontented in proportion to the importance of the facts they misconceive. If they remain quiet under such misconceptions it is a lethargy, the forerunner of death to the public liberty. We have had 13. states independant 11. years. There has been one rebellion. That comes to one rebellion in a century and a half for each state. What country ever existed a century and a half without a rebellion? And what country can preserve it's liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to facts, pardon and pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is it's natural manure. Our Convention has been too much impressed by the insurrection of Massachusets: and in the spur of the moment they are setting up a kite to keep the hen yard in order. I hope in god this article will be rectified before the new constitution is accepted.

- Thomas Jefferson to William Stephens Smith, Paris, 13 Nov. 1787
Reply to message
US Senate Democrats - already cave-in on the gun control bill - 19/03/2013 10:44:55 PM 1379 Views
right wingers are always point out there is no point legislating cosmetics - 19/03/2013 11:52:28 PM 797 Views
Late Term Abortion, Terry Schavio? *NM* - 19/03/2013 11:57:25 PM 395 Views
You know, what you are hoping for will not make any difference whatsoever..... - 20/03/2013 01:07:58 AM 663 Views
"if at first you don't succeed..... fuck it...." - 20/03/2013 04:10:47 AM 670 Views
I can agree with some of what you stated, though I prefer "logical" to "right winger" - 20/03/2013 01:56:34 AM 710 Views
you are correct. i forget sometimes that there **is** some common ground here.... - 20/03/2013 04:19:13 AM 620 Views
There'd be more common ground if anything were ever offered in exchange for concessions - 20/03/2013 02:20:26 PM 669 Views
Ben Franklin said it best... - 20/03/2013 04:14:45 PM 641 Views
interesting how that quote always applies to so many things, isn't it? - 20/03/2013 05:14:30 PM 629 Views
Absolutely - 21/03/2013 12:20:45 AM 699 Views
Re: Ben Franklin said it best... - 21/03/2013 07:16:25 AM 743 Views
There can be NO negotiation, that is the point. This is a Constitutionally protected Right. - 21/03/2013 01:03:54 PM 676 Views
if there have to be concessions, what do you recommend? - 20/03/2013 05:10:53 PM 746 Views
That would depend, something of equal value - 20/03/2013 09:13:23 PM 637 Views
when very little is being given up, how do we determine equal value? - 20/03/2013 10:31:59 PM 909 Views
Outside of legislature people do it all the time, its called negotiation and bargaining - 21/03/2013 10:53:22 AM 660 Views
Re: Outside of legislature people do it all the time, its called negotiation and bargaining - 21/03/2013 07:16:57 PM 713 Views
Re: Outside of legislature people do it all the time, its called negotiation and bargaining - 21/03/2013 08:53:20 PM 796 Views
some answers - 21/03/2013 10:04:45 PM 1030 Views
Re: some answers - 21/03/2013 11:33:21 PM 794 Views
Re: the NRA - 22/03/2013 07:44:06 PM 655 Views
This is a matter of POV bias - 22/03/2013 09:04:25 PM 588 Views
we will have to agree to disagree then - 22/03/2013 10:12:02 PM 647 Views
I already knew we disagreed, that's why I suggested bargaining - 22/03/2013 11:11:04 PM 616 Views
i am merely taking the NRA at their word(s) - 23/03/2013 12:13:18 AM 590 Views
Re: i am merely taking the NRA at their word(s) - 23/03/2013 02:04:39 AM 851 Views
i am not trying to sway, just come to an understanding - 23/03/2013 03:03:14 PM 817 Views
I think you've actually managed to widen our gap - 23/03/2013 03:53:55 PM 824 Views
yes, because it was a failed attempt to re-boot and start the debate from the beginning..... - 24/03/2013 03:33:05 AM 1006 Views
I've difficulty seeing the point of going back to first principles but I'm willing to try - 24/03/2013 02:13:29 PM 628 Views
this has been more insightful than our previous tit-for-tat responses, actually - 26/03/2013 07:40:27 PM 613 Views
There's always room for reaosnable dialogue - 26/03/2013 10:09:58 PM 899 Views
even so, we are at yet another impasse.... - 26/03/2013 11:37:04 PM 715 Views
Probably, I don't know why that surprises you - 27/03/2013 02:02:54 AM 598 Views
I can see the argument for limiting magazine capapcity but it would be hard to enforce - 20/03/2013 05:11:51 PM 642 Views
It would be a stupid meaningless "feel good" law as changing magazines takes almost no time. *NM* - 21/03/2013 01:05:34 PM 350 Views
I can't argue that - 21/03/2013 06:14:09 PM 656 Views
canada's magazine restrictions are credited with reducing fatalities in a mass shooting - 21/03/2013 07:22:45 PM 728 Views
what is high capacity? - 21/03/2013 11:09:09 PM 621 Views
according to the law, whatever is larger than the legal limit - 21/03/2013 11:31:08 PM 647 Views
There is no gun control, only gun *centralization* - 20/03/2013 05:32:59 PM 683 Views
Regarding guns sold which are used in crimes - 20/03/2013 10:41:21 PM 630 Views
Your specified legal requirements already exist. *NM* - 21/03/2013 02:05:12 AM 341 Views
So what other stipulations would you put into effect? *NM* - 21/03/2013 02:42:53 AM 327 Views
none- I'd simply actually punish criminals instead of trying to "reform" them. *NM* - 21/03/2013 01:13:29 PM 350 Views
Criminals need to be punished AND reformed for their inevitable release back into society *NM* - 21/03/2013 11:58:20 PM 322 Views
I've always been rather partial to the criminal justice system in Heinlein's Starship Troopers novel - 22/03/2013 02:42:09 AM 731 Views
Yeah you're right. Let's just kill everybody who commits a crime - 22/03/2013 02:46:49 AM 664 Views
*NM* - 22/03/2013 10:55:36 AM 350 Views
That's not in Starship Troopers - 22/03/2013 12:51:44 PM 659 Views
Yeah, there was a small number of capital offenses (13 I think), most not specified. - 22/03/2013 05:27:11 PM 636 Views
14 then, he lists stupidity as one in another book - 22/03/2013 07:35:13 PM 676 Views
That's why we NEED to reform prisoners - 22/03/2013 10:33:08 PM 611 Views
It is probably an option we should work harder to develop - 23/03/2013 12:38:33 AM 665 Views
Out of curiosity. Is anyone against background checks at gun shows, and if so, why? *NM* - 21/03/2013 09:38:59 AM 334 Views
Not in principle but somewhat in practice - 21/03/2013 11:25:25 AM 782 Views
For what its worth.... - 21/03/2013 03:13:44 PM 627 Views
Personally, I am worried about criminals with guns. BUT... - 22/03/2013 03:44:47 PM 919 Views
What you are not factoring into your though process is that most criminals feels the same way. - 24/03/2013 12:56:04 PM 928 Views
I realize that can be the case. But... - 25/03/2013 03:32:59 PM 840 Views
Twice I was almost robbed, and my parents were robbed several times. - 26/03/2013 01:35:11 PM 546 Views

Reply to Message