Thoughts on gun control..?

@parados,

So call right balancing is a great way/mean of not granting the freedoms that a constitution or charter call for.

See Canada with a fine sounding charter of rights that mean little due to so call rights balancing.

2 Replies

@BillRM,

BillRM wrote:

So call right balancing is a great way/mean of not granting the freedoms that a constitution or charter call for.

See Canada with a fine sounding charter of rights that mean little due to so call rights balancing.

The purpose of the Bill of Rights
was to DISABLE government from interfering
in designated areas of concern, regardless of how intensely politicians wish to interfere.

For instance, a Moslem elected to Congress may passionately wish
to compel all INFIDELS to adopt Islam, but he is disabled from
any such jurisdiction, by the Bill of Rights,
the same as an ordinary liberal Congressman may crave a statute prohibiting
American citizens from being defensively armed when thay use the streets,
but he lacks jurisdiction (tho his yearning exceed that of the Moslem).

David

0 Replies

One thought (thawt) on gun control
that I 've had is a statute prohibiting
any person on the payroll of any government
within the borders of the USA from being armed on-the-job,
but requiring everyone else to be armed at all times
(other than bathing, to avoid rust)

and having prisons removed from the North American Continent.

David

0 Replies

Relating to my last post, picture this:
the DEA arrives with lights n sirens
(un-armed) and thay hurry down on their knees, begging & pleading
with the victim of their raid, that he shud not grow nor use cannabis.

THAT is the proper place of government,
before its Creator, the Citizen.

David

1 Reply

David, in your heart of hearts you are aching to blow away a cop, or an FBI man, or failing that any citizen would do. We will probebly be reading about you in the paper one of these days.

1 Reply

@RABEL222,

RABEL222 wrote:

David, in your heart of hearts you are aching to blow away a cop, or an FBI man,
or failing that any citizen would do. We will probebly be reading about you in the paper one of these days.

Your efforts at telepathy
r dismal failures. Thay remain safe from me.

I have had them for friends,
and I 'd welcome more in the future.

David

0 Replies

@OmSigDAVID,

Quote:

THAT is the proper place of government,
before its Creator, the Citizen.

Live in a jungle do you, without roads, bridges...?

1 Reply

@revelette,

DAVID wrote:

THAT is the proper place of government,
before its Creator, the Citizen.

revelette wrote:

Live in a jungle do you, without roads, bridges...?

Let that be taken care of by private enterprize.
We need to constrict n progressively degrade government.

David

1 Reply

@BillRM,

BillRM wrote:

So call right balancing is a great way/mean of not granting the freedoms that a constitution or charter call for.

Really Bill?

So the 2nd amendment which grants me the right to keep and bear arms means I can take one of your guns if I don't have one because my right to have a gun should not be balanced against your property rights?

An interesting argument on your part Bill, but I don't think you would agree that others can take your guns because their gun rights trump your property rights.

1 Reply

@parados,

BillRM wrote:

So call right balancing is a great way/mean of not granting the freedoms that a constitution or charter call for.

parados wrote:

Really Bill?

So the 2nd amendment which grants me the right to keep and bear arms means I can take one of your guns if I don't have one because my right to have a gun should not be balanced against your property rights?

An interesting argument on your part Bill, but I don't think you would agree that others can take your guns because their gun rights trump your property rights.

The Founders wud not take your twisted fantasy notions seriously.
The amendment only disables government from interfering
with the right to bear arms, by putting it beyond jurisdictional reach.

David

1 Reply

@OmSigDAVID,

So in other words, it isn't an unlimited right.

1 Reply

@parados,

So, in other words: your reasoning is twisted n false.

0 Replies

@OmSigDAVID,

Quote:

Let that be taken care of by private enterprize.

Would probably work out as well as private fire departments who don't go to fires unless they are paid to do it. Poor people wouldn't be allowed on the roads unless they pay, if the don't pay they won't be able to go to work so they would just be in between a rock and hard place trying to put food on the table or using the private roads and bridges in order to go to work.

1 Reply

@revelette,

DAVID wrote:

Let that be taken care of by private enterprize.

revelette wrote:

Would probably work out as well as private fire departments who don't go to fires unless they are paid to do it. Poor people wouldn't be allowed on the roads unless they pay, if the don't pay they won't be able to go to work so they would just be in between a rock and hard place trying to put food on the table or using the private roads and bridges in order to go to work.

Yea ?
Is that how it was b4 governments began building roads ?

2 Replies

@OmSigDAVID,

Quote:

Is that how it was b4 governments began building roads ?

You mean back when we still had mostly dirt roads?

1 Reply

@revelette,

I do mean that.

1 Reply

@OmSigDAVID,

I don't really know the history of our country's infrastructure or any related history so I can't really answer your question.

However, given the example of a man losing his home because of a $75 dollar fee, it really don't ague well for private companies building our nation's infrastructure.

Firefighters let home burn over $75 fee -- again

But never mind, I am derailing the thread.

2 Replies

@revelette,

If private companies built roads, then presumably thay 'd be toll roads,
but thay 'd not be likely to price themselves out of the market. Tolls r trivial.

Admittedly, people can be too stingy to pay tolls.
In NY in another century, my dead friend, Neil,
was driving my car into Manhattan. I offered to pay the toll,
but he insisted on taking the long way around instead.

Even so, I 've never heard it alleged that the poor
do not use toll roads.

David

1 Reply

@revelette,

It's OK. They were obviously trailer trash.

0 Replies

@OmSigDAVID,

Quote:

Yea ?
Is that how it was b4 governments began building roads ?

You mean back before there were roads at all?

The Romans built roads.
The Sumarians built roads.
The Egyptians built road.
All built because of government.

I am curious when you think the government didn't build roads.

1 Reply

Thoughts on gun control..?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know