Mexico Calls On the US to Violate Our Constitutional Gun Rights

@roger,

Both factcheck.org and politifact address the issue. Here's what politifact has to say:

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2009/apr/16/barack-obama/Obama-claims-90-percent-guns-used-Mexico/

1 Reply

@OmSigDAVID,

You initially wrote "good improvements," so, to you who insists on questioning my intellect, I addressed the question, "What are bad improvements?" You answered with nonsense.

1 Reply

@JTT,

So was I. The man trades in nonsense constantly.

0 Replies

@OmSigDAVID,

The Mexicans do care about our Constitution because they are forced to relate to us on the political level.

0 Replies

@Irishk,

Thanks for the research. You're good at that, you know?

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2009/apr/16/barack-obama/Obama-claims-90-percent-guns-used-Mexico/

Quote:

We think the ATF number, presented in its proper context, provides legitimate and useful information to weigh when considering U.S. policy. We find the implication that the number could be as low as 17 percent is unrealistic because it assumes that every gun that has not been traced comes from somewhere other than the United States. That's faulty logic.

But we think Obama also mischaracterizes the statistic some when he says 90 percent of the guns recovered in Mexico come from the United States. Not every gun recovered in Mexico is submitted to the ATF for tracing. And so Obama and others can't know exactly what percentage come from the United States. They can only speak to the guns successfully traced by the ATF. And so we rule Obama's statement Half True.

What this extract indicates to me is that neither position is an outright lie, and both sides of the issue willing to put their own slant on the same facts. No surprises.

1 Reply

@roger,

Yeah, that 80% claim mentioned in Congress last week looked kinda high, so I looked it up. Factcheck says pretty much the same thing. I think there are accurate statistics out there somewhere....the time spent looking might be wasted, though. I need to finish my Spring cleaning.

0 Replies

Well, thereyago, David. The Mexican Constitution and Mexican law have restrictions on gun ownership. Since you and oralloy seem to feel it is your constitutional right, nay, in your case, DUTY, to arm CRIMINALS anywhere, no matter their citizenship, no matter they are in violation of their own country's laws, criminals who will then , and this is no surprise, go out and kill wholesale and destroy civil order, and since ultra-right activist judges have misread the second amendment in such a way that you feel justified in enabling those criminals in their crime sprees, then, yeah, to the extent Mexicans have no respect for the American Constitution, they have a whole lot of innocent dead bodies to show their lack of respect is justified.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

Quote:

By any measure, America is the only free country on the planet ...

whose citizens are told what countries they may or may not visit. Let them freedom bells ring!

0 Replies

My definition of a free country is one where no one is in a position to take me out because he doesn't like the way I made a left turn, or one where there's no chance I will get caught in the crossfire when someone doesn't like the way the barista serves him his latte at Starbucks. Oralloy's definition of a free country is one where he gets to generate the crossfire. I like my definition better. The Founding Fathers would too.

4 Replies

@MontereyJack,

... or where the police are required to ask for papers if you have a little too much of a tan.

That seemed to work pretty well for the founding fathers too.

0 Replies

@plainoldme,

plainoldme wrote:

You initially wrote "good improvements," so, to you who insists on questioning my intellect,
I addressed the question, "What are bad improvements?"
You answered with nonsense.

Its not nonsense; its just that you appear to be
intellectually crippled to the extent of being unable to understand easy concepts.
Have u ever had a stroke, or experimented with recreational pharmacy?

1 Reply

@MontereyJack,

MontereyJack wrote:

My definition of a free country

Yours is a unique definition of a free country,
in harmony with the authoritarianism of nazism and communism,
but I recognize your right to have any uniquely personal definitions of anything, that u wish to dream up;
if u wanna define the Moon as being made of green cheese, u can DO that, tho it has no effect on the Moon,
nor on any person other than YOU.

MontereyJack wrote:

is one where no one is in a position to take me out
because he doesn't like the way I made a left turn,

So, according to U,
Stalinist Russia, Nazi Germany, Red China and North Korea
are all free countries because their populations were all disarmed, right??????????????

MontereyJack wrote:

or one where there's no chance [ ?? ] I will get caught in the crossfire when someone doesn't like the way
the barista serves him his latte at Starbucks.

U seem to think that people who create cross-fires choose to obay the law; what a crazy notion!!
Citizens can make their own guns, including fully automatic weapons.

Thay have DONE SO, even in prison, with the guards around. That is a person 's own independent choice,
like whether he 'll have marijuana or not or whether he 'd make bathtub gin in the 1920s.

Your idea that GOVERNMENT can control this is lame-minded, idle superstition.

MontereyJack wrote:

Oralloy's definition of a free country is one where he gets to generate the crossfire. I like my definition better.

The Founding Fathers would too.

The Founders were on MY side; thay were Freedom Fighters; thay were Freedom Lovers; thay were Gun Lovers, like ME.
The Founders woud scorn the NRA for compromising and selling out
instead of fighting resolutely against gun control.

0 Replies

@MontereyJack,

MontereyJack wrote:

Well, thereyago, David. The Mexican Constitution and Mexican law have restrictions on gun ownership. Since you and oralloy seem to feel it is your constitutional right, nay, in your case, DUTY, to arm CRIMINALS anywhere, no matter their citizenship, no matter they are in violation of their own country's laws, criminals who will then, and this is no surprise, go out and kill wholesale and destroy civil order,

I've never said anything about a Constitutional right to arm criminals, and I'm pretty sure David hasn't either.

MontereyJack wrote:

and since ultra-right activist judges have misread the second amendment

Following the Constitution does not make someone ultra-right, and it sure doesn't make them activist.

And while the right that they found in the Second Amendment is actually found in the Ninth Amendment, that is actually a minor misreading, since both amendments are equally valid.

MontereyJack wrote:

then, yeah, to the extent Mexicans have no respect for the American Constitution, they have a whole lot of innocent dead bodies to show their lack of respect is justified.

Our Constitution has not contributed to any dead bodies.

Mexican gangs would have just as many assault rifles even if they couldn't get them in the US. The only thing the US is an irreplaceable source of is FN 57 handguns.

And Mexican gangs would kill people even if it were possible to deprive them of assault rifles.

0 Replies

@MontereyJack,

MontereyJack wrote:

My definition of a free country is one where no one is in a position to take me out because he doesn't like the way I made a left turn, or one where there's no chance I will get caught in the crossfire when someone doesn't like the way the barista serves him his latte at Starbucks. Oralloy's definition of a free country is one where he gets to generate the crossfire.

You confuse the definition of freedom with the definition of security.

And you yearn for a utopia that cannot be achieved.

MontereyJack wrote:

I like my definition better. The Founding Fathers would too.

Nope. The Founding Fathers ensured that you would never be able to take our freedom away. They knew what they were doing.

2 Replies

@oralloy,

Jack's mind is alien to the thinking of the Founders.

0 Replies

Liberal Supremacist fear all citizens that are armed and able to defend themselves.

1 Reply

@H2O MAN,

H2O MAN wrote:

Liberal Supremacist fear all citizens that are armed and able to defend themselves.

That 's RIGHT. Authoritarians have problems with an armed populace.
If the citizens are well armed, thay are more difficult to shove around.

David

0 Replies

@OmSigDAVID,

LOOK TO YOUR OWN WRITING. YOU WROTE 'GOOD IMPROVEMENTS.'

0 Replies

@MontereyJack,

david twists and twists and twists everything that is said to him. For some time, I thought it was a game but now I realize he truly does not understand the written word.

0 Replies

@oralloy,

Sorry. Monterey Jack does not . . . let me repeat, does not . . . confuse freedom with security. However, scroll through om sig's writing and you will see that he not only confuses freedom with security but he throws in paranoia for good measure.

And the only utopia I see described here is one in which all the little boys wear their guns outside their pants . . . with no apologies to Townes Van Zandt.

3 Replies

Mexico Calls On the US to Violate Our Constitutional Gun Rights

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know