Another major school shooting today ... Newtown, Conn

@XXSpadeMasterXX,

XXSpadeMasterXX wrote:

oralloy wrote:
You have repeatedly called for laws that would violate my civil rights.

Wrong!

No, you have done that repeatedly.

XXSpadeMasterXX wrote:

If the president...And american people want to set laws to petition stricter laws...then they can do it...

And your attempts to violate our rights will be defeated in both Congress and the courts.

XXSpadeMasterXX wrote:

that is why the Constitution can be amended...

You aren't going to amend the Constitution.

XXSpadeMasterXX wrote:

Like you said the courts will decide....

They will strike down all your unconstitutional laws.

0 Replies

@oralloy,

oralloy wrote:

parados wrote:
At least one of those guns is already illegal under Federal law.

Nonsense.

I asked him to please tell us what makes him think one is illegal, but he hasn't responded.

2 Replies

@XXSpadeMasterXX,

XXSpadeMasterXX wrote:

The president can not amend laws?

Nope.

I know you don't get that whole Constitution thing, but we don't live in a dictatorship.

0 Replies

http://www.a-human-right.com/ccw/s_2million.jpg

0 Replies

@H2O MAN,

Why is your name H2O man? Do you get thirsty often? Do you require a lot of hydration?

0 Replies

@H2O MAN,

Hey, it was just 3 questions...You do not have to get hateful...

I did not know if you worked for Poland Spring (TM) or something...

1 Reply

@oralloy,

Quote:

Should be legal, but you'd have to find a vender to sell them to you.

You could manufacture them and be the vendor.

I think that's already being done actually but Americans are not allowed to buy them. Saudi gas pump attendants are okay I have heard. Despite them being so old fashioned about the woman problem.

1 Reply

The feds have not been able to enforce their existing gun ban laws.
What makes them think more laws restricting gun ownership will make a difference?

Voluntary compliance is what they need to succeed.

Obama and his liberal democratics fail when no American volunteers to join their suicide mission.

0 Replies

@XXSpadeMasterXX,

XXSpadeMasterXX wrote:

Hey, it was just 3 questions...You do not have to get hateful...

Who (other than the Freedom Haters) is getting hateful?

1 Reply

@oralloy,

I thought you guys may have been being hateful to vote those posts down...

Those questions had nothing to do with gun laws...

1 Reply

@oralloy,

Quote:

It will also be necessary to destroy the careers of any rural politician who dares to support these proposed atrocities.

Our wet liberal BBC flagship Newsnight did a 15 minute feechewer on your gun debate just now. In rural Illinois and Texas.

What sprung to mind listening to the gun toters was Don Quixote. And various bits of film I have seen about Russia east of the Urals.

Why can't you get your telegraph poles in line?

1 Reply

@XXSpadeMasterXX,

XXSpadeMasterXX wrote:

The president can not amend laws?

That's a very nice question. Specifically, no he cannot. Yet both Bush and Obama have used "signing statements" to evade parts of laws they don't happen to like. I don't like them any more than I like the concept of "executive orders" being issued in lieu of laws, but I'm not able to argue the legality. It happens, and I would like to see a serious legal challenge. Congress is letting us down by not defending its turf.

Amendments to the Constitution are provided for in the Constitution. The process does not involve the exceutive branch.

1 Reply

@roger,

Thank you...it will evolve...overtime maybe...But someday more children will be able to sleep....

0 Replies

@oralloy,

Quote:

Hard to see how it would be covered under an individual right.

Only if it is necessary for it to be hard to see.

1 Reply

@spendius,

spendius wrote:

You could manufacture them and be the vendor.

DU shells might take some specialized manufacturing ability. What's the melting point of uranium again?

1 Reply

Two-thirds of the Congress must propose amendments, or call for a constitutional convention. Three-fourths of the states must ratify amendments. Roger is absolutely correct--both that the executive branch is not involved in the amendment of the constitution, and that Presidents have used, or attempted to use, signing statements and executive orders to get around the powers of the legislative branch.

Of course, with the herd of jackasses we have in Congress right now, one should not wonder at it. The approval rating of Congress has been sinking into the toilet since the Bush years.

2 Replies

@Setanta,

What's your opinion on the legality of those signing statements? I'm tempted to think they are legal, but only because several presidents have gotten away with using them.

0 Replies

@XXSpadeMasterXX,

XXSpadeMasterXX wrote:

I thought you guys may have been being hateful to vote those posts down...

Those questions had nothing to do with gun laws...

Usually it's the posts that defend civil rights that end up being voted down.

I don't think I've voted down any of your posts (I generally don't like voting posts down, because then they are hidden by default).

0 Replies

This thread has gotten over 4,500 posts in 33 days...

It is around 7+ pages of posts a day...

0 Replies

@spendius,

spendius wrote:

oralloy wrote:
It will also be necessary to destroy the careers of any rural politician who dares to support these proposed atrocities.

Our wet liberal BBC flagship Newsnight did a 15 minute feechewer on your gun debate just now. In rural Illinois and Texas.

What sprung to mind listening to the gun toters was Don Quixote. And various bits of film I have seen about Russia east of the Urals.

Why can't you get your telegraph poles in line?

Note that we're the ones with the power. The House Democrats publicly backed off from any ban on assault weapons just a couple hours after the NRA broke their silence.

0 Replies

Another major school shooting today ... Newtown, Conn

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know