did you protest it? if not you let them take your rights away. end of story.
can you be wiretapped without a warrant?
can your neighbor report you to authorities on suspicion of anything at all?
do you have to endure tsa patdowns at the airport?
so yeah, by going along with it, you gave up your liberties for security. we all did, either willingly or unwillingly.
don't be all sanctimonious and say the big bad government took away your rights, by not fighting for them you let them take them.
Me sanctimonius? Are you serious? The big bad government DID take away our rights with the Patriot Act, and Barry lied when he said he'd repeal it. He didn't...and nobody said anything!
By the way, I lobby my representatives all the time. Sometimes you don't know as much as you think. And you call me sanctimonious.
You people are to stupid to realize that any gun control is only going to affect law abiding citizens.
Ahh, your usual charming approach..nice.
I would love it if guns were nearly impossible to obtain...that's all. I definitely would love it if law abiding citizens had to do a little more work or waiting to get a gun. I mean, for god sake, I have to wait forever at the DMV for a drivers license...it seems easier to get a gun these days...I don't want to take them away. It is simply too easy for anyone to get one though. And the caliber and magazine capacities are unnecessary. I'm pretty sure the accidents outweigh the scenarios where guns are used to save your live (but that's just a guess).
(Also, aside from the affect vs. effect lesson, maybe check out "too vs. to" before you call others stupid.)
usual approach because in AMT "political party view" always trumps logic.
What do you mean it seems easier to get a gun these days? Have you tried getting a gun/Conceal carry permit?
maybe obtaining guns illegally and not following the rules is the problem.
ah ok, your "logic" is the martyr!
No, I havent tried to get a gun or a permit. But I know how easy they are to obtain. I have a few friends that have purchased guns using alternative outlets as well... These people selling guns at places like flea markets and the likes, should have tougher penalties if caught doing it illegally.
If your a criminal about to commit a crime, are you more inclined to commit a crime knowing people are allowed and could be carrying guns or knowing people are not allowed to carry guns/against the law?
This is a good question, but its my opinion that most gun crime (especially in my area), is committed by uneducated folks who don't think much about their victims and the likelihood that the victims are packing. They don't care. Again though, I'm not saying they should be banned, just more difficult to obtain.
You people are to stupid to realize that any gun control is only going to affect law abiding citizens.
Ahh, your usual charming approach..nice.
I would love it if guns were nearly impossible to obtain...that's all. I definitely would love it if law abiding citizens had to do a little more work or waiting to get a gun. I mean, for god sake, I have to wait forever at the DMV for a drivers license...it seems easier to get a gun these days...I don't want to take them away. It is simply too easy for anyone to get one though. And the caliber and magazine capacities are unnecessary. I'm pretty sure the accidents outweigh the scenarios where guns are used to save your live (but that's just a guess).
(Also, aside from the affect vs. effect lesson, maybe check out "too vs. to" before you call others stupid.)
So you just took someone else post on affect vs effect as fact without knowing? Great, now I know you don't form your own opinions. Maybe actually look up how the words are used again. its Affect with an A.
haha, yeah, because of one post, I don't form my own opinions! You're a funny dude. Oh, and speaking of "you're"...
did you protest it? if not you let them take your rights away. end of story.
can you be wiretapped without a warrant?
can your neighbor report you to authorities on suspicion of anything at all?
do you have to endure tsa patdowns at the airport?
so yeah, by going along with it, you gave up your liberties for security. we all did, either willingly or unwillingly.
don't be all sanctimonious and say the big bad government took away your rights, by not fighting for them you let them take them.
Me sanctimonius? Are you serious? The big bad government DID take away our rights with the Patriot Act, and Barry lied when he said he'd repeal it. He didn't...and nobody said anything!
By the way, I lobby my representatives all the time. Sometimes you don't know as much as you think. And you call me sanctimonious.
great for you, glad to see you taking part in the system..
but you never answered my question of "how does making getting a gun a little tougher equal sacrificing liberty for security?"
"You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
Ben Franklin said, “Anyone who trades liberty for security deserves neither liberty nor security”.
I think Electric Delta stated it pretty clearly.
Confused? For starters, look up Ben Franklin....
who is advocating giving up liberty for security? your example has nothing to do with this discussion.
that happened when your boy bush signed the patriot act. we gave up certain freedoms so everyone can feel all safe and warm and snuggly and "secure". i don't see you complaining about giving up those liberties...
nobody is advocating taking all guns. nobody at all. so calm dawn.
it is a stupid argument to make that if they want to put restrictions on gun ownership, or make people get a license to buy a gun, that that it taking away your liberty.
and the application of that franklin quote is faulty logic. wouldn't taking your liberty (right to own a gun) also take away your right to protect yourself (security)??? :?
There are already restrictions on buying guns.
There are already regulations. Everytime a shooting/tragedy happens, Politicians (lawyers) do what they do: start passing laws.
The fundamental flaw of liberals is that they believe Gov't can fix EVERY problem.
More laws, more regulations, more restrictions, more rules..... All while screaming about freedom.
It's bullshit.
0
unsung
I stopped by on March 7 2024. First time in many years, had to update payment info. Hope all is well. Politicians suck. Bye. Posts: 9,487
but you never answered my question of "how does making getting a gun a little tougher equal sacrificing liberty for security?"
Why should I jump through hoops to defend myself? The Constitution gives me the RIGHT to defend myself. Nobody is asking to arm themselves with nukes, let's get real.
Do you need a license to type on this website and speak freely?
until people as a whole are worthy of weilding the power of guns, then perhaps we should rethink our gun laws?
don't flame me.... it is a serious question...
if we don't ask serious questions, then there will be no contemplating the very root of the issues...
Your first sentence is why people like you are so dangerous. You don't understand your own rights, or history.
And you will consistently vote to undermine your own Constitution, and ultimately your own freedom- and probably don't even know you're doing it.
WHO THE FUCK GETS TO DECIDE WHEN "PEOPLE AS A WHOLE ARE READY" FOR ANYTHING?
The Constitution gives THE PEOPLE/ US the power, and to keep that power out of the hands of those you are suggesting we just hand it over to!!
but you never answered my question of "how does making getting a gun a little tougher equal sacrificing liberty for security?"
Why should I jump through hoops to defend myself? The Constitution gives me the RIGHT to defend myself. Nobody is asking to arm themselves with nukes, let's get real.
Do you need a license to type on this website and speak freely?
exaggerate much? that is like me saying all guns and all gun owners are bad.
let's get real here for a second.
how many gun owners who have gotten their guns legally have killed people? how many "legal" guns have accidently killed a kid who got in dad's gun safe?
guns are used for offensive and defensive purposes. unfortunately more people use them for offensive purposes....
"You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
but you never answered my question of "how does making getting a gun a little tougher equal sacrificing liberty for security?"
It becomes an issue of progressively more and more government control. We have been granted the right by our Constitiution to defend ourselves. The Founders didn't say "you have the right to defend yourself IF..."
There is no fair way to filter potential buyers, outside of the criminal background checks currently used. None.
guns are used for offensive and defensive purposes. unfortunately more people use them for offensive purposes....
How could you possible defend or prove this statement? The number of peaceful, law-abiding gun owners is EASILY in the millions. I don't see millions of people going around shooting every day. Your claim is completely preprosterous and indefensible.
until people as a whole are worthy of weilding the power of guns, then perhaps we should rethink our gun laws?
don't flame me.... it is a serious question...
if we don't ask serious questions, then there will be no contemplating the very root of the issues...
Your first sentence is why people like you are so dangerous. You don't understand your own rights, or history.
And you will consistently vote to undermine your own Constitution, and ultimately your own freedom- and probably don't even know you're doing it.
WHO THE FUCK GETS TO DECIDE WHEN "PEOPLE AS A WHOLE ARE READY" FOR ANYTHING?
The Constitution gives THE PEOPLE/ US the power, and to keep that power out of the hands of those you are suggesting we just hand it over to!!
Think man!!
i understand perfectly fine. i see the world differently from you. does not make you wrong and me right and vice versa.
i appreciate you pointing out that you think that i am undermining the constitution with my political views. and that i don't know my history. i love the condescention in your tone. you can't see things any other way than through your own eyes. i see things and try to make them better for everyone. you seem to be one of those that clings to your gun and your bible when you feel threatened by anything new, ie making gun sales and access and permits a little better regulated.
i have not said to "hand over your guns to the government". i just said there should be restrictions and limits on things, like who the hell needs a 30 round magazine? who needs hollow point bullets or armor piercing bullets? you don't need those things to hunt, which so many pro gun people have said, unless you are hunting people. plain and simple. or unless you need to compensate for something else.
Post edited by gimmesometruth27 on
"You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
but you never answered my question of "how does making getting a gun a little tougher equal sacrificing liberty for security?"
It becomes an issue of progressively more and more government control. We have been granted the right by our Constitiution to defend ourselves. The Founders didn't say "you have the right to defend yourself IF..."
There is no fair way to filter potential buyers, outside of the criminal background checks currently used. None.
yeah and african americans were 3/5 of a person at one time too. old documents can and should be updated from time to time if the current system is not working.
"You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
guns are used for offensive and defensive purposes. unfortunately more people use them for offensive purposes....
How could you possible defend or prove this statement? The number of peaceful, law-abiding gun owners is EASILY in the millions. I don't see millions of people going around shooting every day. Your claim is completely preprosterous and indefensible.
i am including things like holding up a store and brandishing a gun in addition to murders and shootings where people are injured.. using the gun to intimidate and threaten people. most robberies are committed by armed people. and how many of those robberies are stopped by joe hero with a concealed weapon? why is it illegal to possess a gun in the process of committing a crime? why do the charges escalate when the perp has a gun on them?
"You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
yeah and african americans were 3/5 of a person at one time too. old documents can and should be updated from time to time if the current system is not working.
So who decides how to update those "old documents"? Barack Obama? George Soros? The United Nations?
That "old document" has done pretty well for this land and her people.
By the way, don't play the race card. With all due respect, that is the most redundant and trite argument in the world. We actually voted in an African-American.
guns are used for offensive and defensive purposes. unfortunately more people use them for offensive purposes....
How could you possible defend or prove this statement? The number of peaceful, law-abiding gun owners is EASILY in the millions. I don't see millions of people going around shooting every day. Your claim is completely preprosterous and indefensible.
i am including things like holding up a store and brandishing a gun in addition to murders and shootings where people are injured.. using the gun to intimidate and threaten people. most robberies are committed by armed people. and how many of those robberies are stopped by joe hero with a concealed weapon? why is it illegal to possess a gun in the process of committing a crime? why do the charges escalate when the perp has a gun on them?
So we need to penalize EVERYONE for their irresponsible actions? Why can't people be responsible? I don't need Big Brother regulating my life because some crack fiend holds up a liquor store.
By the way, law-abiding gun owners stop way more crime than you know. By outlawing guns, you sacrifice personal liberty and put law enforcement in danger.
yeah and african americans were 3/5 of a person at one time too. old documents can and should be updated from time to time if the current system is not working.
So who decides how to update those "old documents"? Barack Obama? George Soros? The United Nations?
That "old document" has done pretty well for this land and her people.
By the way, don't play the race card. With all due respect, that is the most redundant and trite argument in the world. We actually voted in an African-American.
I think the slavery issue reflects what Gimme is trying to say, its not the 'race card'. The U.S. Constitution was written a long time ago, and there are a few parts that don't reflect the times anymore. The men that came up with the "right to bear arms" didnt likely foresee semiautomatic weapons, Ak-47s, 30+ magazines full of hollow point bullets..etc, etc..
Many of us are arguing that gun laws need to be stricter because we are tired of seeing innocent people dying needlessly. I don't mean to be a dick, but some people in here make it seem that their rights to own a gun are more important than innocent peoples lives.
I think the slavery issue reflects what Gimme is trying to say, its not the 'race card'. The U.S. Constitution was written a long time ago, and there are a few parts that don't reflect the times anymore. The men that came up with the "right to bear arms" didnt likely foresee semiautomatic weapons, Ak-47s, 30+ magazines full of hollow point bullets..etc, etc..
Many of us are arguing that gun laws need to be stricter because we are tired of seeing innocent people dying needlessly. I don't mean to be a dick, but some people in here make it seem that their rights to own a gun are more important than innocent peoples lives.
I don't want to see people hurt. I hate waking up to bad news like that, it's heartbreaking. Nonetheless, we can't alter the Constitution to suit the "modern world." We can't leave ourselves weak and without protection. By that same token, those who own firearms must act responsibly, and the overwhelming majority does. Again the OVERWHELMING majority does.
I don't mean to sound like a dick either, but some people in here make it seem like I should forfeit my rights because they don't like guns.
I think the slavery issue reflects what Gimme is trying to say, its not the 'race card'. The U.S. Constitution was written a long time ago, and there are a few parts that don't reflect the times anymore. The men that came up with the "right to bear arms" didnt likely foresee semiautomatic weapons, Ak-47s, 30+ magazines full of hollow point bullets..etc, etc..
Many of us are arguing that gun laws need to be stricter because we are tired of seeing innocent people dying needlessly. I don't mean to be a dick, but some people in here make it seem that their rights to own a gun are more important than innocent peoples lives.
I don't want to see people hurt. I hate waking up to bad news like that, it's heartbreaking. Nonetheless, we can't alter the Constitution to suit the "modern world." We can't leave ourselves weak and without protection. By that same token, those who own firearms must act responsibly, and the overwhelming majority does. Again the OVERWHELMING majority does.
I don't mean to sound like a dick either, but some people in here make it seem like I should forfeit my rights because they don't like guns.
I think you may be assuming too much..I dont believe Gimme is even saying forfeit you rights..just stricter laws. You also say there is no other way to filter out potential buyers outside of criminal background checks. I completely disagree. I dont have the immediate answer, but if waiting periods are longer or you have to reload after 10 rounds instead of 30, how is that compromise not worth some peoples lives?
Nobody on the pro-gun side ever has an answer for the fact that the "right to bear arms" has nothing to do with the evolution of a firearm and how much more powerful and deadly they are today as opposed to 200 years ago when that idea was drafted.
Nobody on the pro-gun side ever has an answer for the fact that the "right to bear arms" has nothing to do with the evolution of a firearm and how much more powerful and deadly they are today as opposed to 200 years ago when that idea was drafted.
If it's not broken, why fix it? The law is the law. It works.
The "one-handgun a month law" is a law that limits handgun purchases to one per 30-days, for an individual. Proponents support such laws to keep criminals, or would be criminals from amassing large numbers of firearms in a short time. Supporters argue that gun traffickers frequently purchase large numbers of cheap handguns from states without such laws, particularly those in the south,[citation needed] to sell them in states with such laws.
The first of such laws was passed in 1975 in South Carolina (and has since been repealed). The laws gained fame after the state of Virginia enacted one in 1993 to reduce gun trafficking to the Northeast.[citation needed] At the time, 40% of the guns used in crime in New York City were traced back to Virginia.[1]
Nobody on the pro-gun side ever has an answer for the fact that the "right to bear arms" has nothing to do with the evolution of a firearm and how much more powerful and deadly they are today as opposed to 200 years ago when that idea was drafted.
If it's not broken, why fix it? The law is the law. It works.
Thats your opinion.
I feel it is broken.
You might recall (I think you were in on the discussion about Giffords shooting)...
They used to have magazine limits to like 10-15 rounds. That freak in Arizona purchased his gun legally, and got off 30 rounds before someone tackled him. They were talking about re-establishing this law that would limit magazine capacities.. something that would've likely saved lives.. and been such a terrbile inconvenience for the responsible gun owners to have to reload at the range... :roll:
yeah and african americans were 3/5 of a person at one time too. old documents can and should be updated from time to time if the current system is not working.
So who decides how to update those "old documents"? Barack Obama? George Soros? The United Nations?
That "old document" has done pretty well for this land and her people.
By the way, don't play the race card. With all due respect, that is the most redundant and trite argument in the world. We actually voted in an African-American.
it has been amended 17 times, not counting the original 10 which are called the bill of rights.
if it has been changed/added to 17 times then it is not perfect. it has been changed to reflect the changing times. that is why they call it a "living document" because it changes over time, as the people in our government see fit.
to answer your first question, Article V of the Constitution spells out the processes by which amendments can be proposed and ratified.
those can be found http://usgovinfo.about.com/od/usconstit ... tamend.htm
so no, those people you listed can not change it alone.
"You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
Thats your opinion.
I feel it is broken.
You might recall (I think you were in on the discussion about Giffords shooting)...
They used to have magazine limits to like 10-15 rounds. That freak in Arizona purchased his gun legally, and got off 30 rounds before someone tackled him. They were talking about re-establishing this law that would limit magazine capacities.. something that would've likely saved lives.. and been such a terrbile inconvenience for the responsible gun owners to have to reload at the range... :roll:
That policy is your opinion and I disagree also. The anti-gun left never lets a crisis go to waste.
Thats your opinion.
I feel it is broken.
You might recall (I think you were in on the discussion about Giffords shooting)...
They used to have magazine limits to like 10-15 rounds. That freak in Arizona purchased his gun legally, and got off 30 rounds before someone tackled him. They were talking about re-establishing this law that would limit magazine capacities.. something that would've likely saved lives.. and been such a terrbile inconvenience for the responsible gun owners to have to reload at the range... :roll:
That policy is your opinion and I disagree also. The anti-gun left never lets a crisis go to waste.
True, it is my opinion, and please excuse me for feeling that an update to a law might have saved the life of an innocent 9 year old that was needlessly murdered...So you'd rather have the ability to shoot off 30+ rounds for convenience than possibly save lives.. I get it, nevermind.
Americans and their constitution. I don't understand the obsession with an article that was written 100's of years ago??
Keep clinging to the past America. Meanwhile the rest of the world will bypass you. It really is the bible thumpers and Republicans that hold America back. It's such a beautiful country. It's really too bad.
Edit: And doesn't the constitution have a bunch of amendments? If it was so great, why all the need for amendments?
Americans and their constitution. I don't understand the obsession with an article that was written 100's of years ago??
Keep clinging to the past America. Meanwhile the rest of the world will bypass you. It really is the bible thumpers and Republicans that hold America back. It's such a beautiful country. It's really too bad.
Edit: And doesn't the constitution have a bunch of amendments? If it was so great, why all the need for amendments?
Comments
Me sanctimonius? Are you serious? The big bad government DID take away our rights with the Patriot Act, and Barry lied when he said he'd repeal it. He didn't...and nobody said anything!
By the way, I lobby my representatives all the time. Sometimes you don't know as much as you think. And you call me sanctimonious.
ah ok, your "logic" is the martyr!
No, I havent tried to get a gun or a permit. But I know how easy they are to obtain. I have a few friends that have purchased guns using alternative outlets as well... These people selling guns at places like flea markets and the likes, should have tougher penalties if caught doing it illegally.
This is a good question, but its my opinion that most gun crime (especially in my area), is committed by uneducated folks who don't think much about their victims and the likelihood that the victims are packing. They don't care. Again though, I'm not saying they should be banned, just more difficult to obtain.
haha, yeah, because of one post, I don't form my own opinions! You're a funny dude. Oh, and speaking of "you're"...
its you're not your.
dont even get me started on their, there, and they're.
but you never answered my question of "how does making getting a gun a little tougher equal sacrificing liberty for security?"
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
There are already restrictions on buying guns.
There are already regulations. Everytime a shooting/tragedy happens, Politicians (lawyers) do what they do: start passing laws.
The fundamental flaw of liberals is that they believe Gov't can fix EVERY problem.
More laws, more regulations, more restrictions, more rules..... All while screaming about freedom.
It's bullshit.
Why should I jump through hoops to defend myself? The Constitution gives me the RIGHT to defend myself. Nobody is asking to arm themselves with nukes, let's get real.
Do you need a license to type on this website and speak freely?
Your first sentence is why people like you are so dangerous. You don't understand your own rights, or history.
And you will consistently vote to undermine your own Constitution, and ultimately your own freedom- and probably don't even know you're doing it.
WHO THE FUCK GETS TO DECIDE WHEN "PEOPLE AS A WHOLE ARE READY" FOR ANYTHING?
The Constitution gives THE PEOPLE/ US the power, and to keep that power out of the hands of those you are suggesting we just hand it over to!!
Think man!!
let's get real here for a second.
how many gun owners who have gotten their guns legally have killed people? how many "legal" guns have accidently killed a kid who got in dad's gun safe?
guns are used for offensive and defensive purposes. unfortunately more people use them for offensive purposes....
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
It becomes an issue of progressively more and more government control. We have been granted the right by our Constitiution to defend ourselves. The Founders didn't say "you have the right to defend yourself IF..."
There is no fair way to filter potential buyers, outside of the criminal background checks currently used. None.
How could you possible defend or prove this statement? The number of peaceful, law-abiding gun owners is EASILY in the millions. I don't see millions of people going around shooting every day. Your claim is completely preprosterous and indefensible.
i appreciate you pointing out that you think that i am undermining the constitution with my political views. and that i don't know my history. i love the condescention in your tone. you can't see things any other way than through your own eyes. i see things and try to make them better for everyone. you seem to be one of those that clings to your gun and your bible when you feel threatened by anything new, ie making gun sales and access and permits a little better regulated.
i have not said to "hand over your guns to the government". i just said there should be restrictions and limits on things, like who the hell needs a 30 round magazine? who needs hollow point bullets or armor piercing bullets? you don't need those things to hunt, which so many pro gun people have said, unless you are hunting people. plain and simple. or unless you need to compensate for something else.
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
So who decides how to update those "old documents"? Barack Obama? George Soros? The United Nations?
That "old document" has done pretty well for this land and her people.
By the way, don't play the race card. With all due respect, that is the most redundant and trite argument in the world. We actually voted in an African-American.
So we need to penalize EVERYONE for their irresponsible actions? Why can't people be responsible? I don't need Big Brother regulating my life because some crack fiend holds up a liquor store.
By the way, law-abiding gun owners stop way more crime than you know. By outlawing guns, you sacrifice personal liberty and put law enforcement in danger.
I think the slavery issue reflects what Gimme is trying to say, its not the 'race card'. The U.S. Constitution was written a long time ago, and there are a few parts that don't reflect the times anymore. The men that came up with the "right to bear arms" didnt likely foresee semiautomatic weapons, Ak-47s, 30+ magazines full of hollow point bullets..etc, etc..
Many of us are arguing that gun laws need to be stricter because we are tired of seeing innocent people dying needlessly. I don't mean to be a dick, but some people in here make it seem that their rights to own a gun are more important than innocent peoples lives.
I don't want to see people hurt. I hate waking up to bad news like that, it's heartbreaking. Nonetheless, we can't alter the Constitution to suit the "modern world." We can't leave ourselves weak and without protection. By that same token, those who own firearms must act responsibly, and the overwhelming majority does. Again the OVERWHELMING majority does.
I don't mean to sound like a dick either, but some people in here make it seem like I should forfeit my rights because they don't like guns.
It is fundamental. The Constitution guarantees the American way of life.
And many, many people have died to protect that...
You want to give over all freedoms and power to the Gov't, in the name of protecting an individual?
You would sell us all out- in the name of saving one. Very noble. And very stupid.
No wonder they don't call us the "Greatest Generation."
I think you may be assuming too much..I dont believe Gimme is even saying forfeit you rights..just stricter laws. You also say there is no other way to filter out potential buyers outside of criminal background checks. I completely disagree. I dont have the immediate answer, but if waiting periods are longer or you have to reload after 10 rounds instead of 30, how is that compromise not worth some peoples lives?
Nobody on the pro-gun side ever has an answer for the fact that the "right to bear arms" has nothing to do with the evolution of a firearm and how much more powerful and deadly they are today as opposed to 200 years ago when that idea was drafted.
If it's not broken, why fix it? The law is the law. It works.
The "one-handgun a month law" is a law that limits handgun purchases to one per 30-days, for an individual. Proponents support such laws to keep criminals, or would be criminals from amassing large numbers of firearms in a short time. Supporters argue that gun traffickers frequently purchase large numbers of cheap handguns from states without such laws, particularly those in the south,[citation needed] to sell them in states with such laws.
The first of such laws was passed in 1975 in South Carolina (and has since been repealed). The laws gained fame after the state of Virginia enacted one in 1993 to reduce gun trafficking to the Northeast.[citation needed] At the time, 40% of the guns used in crime in New York City were traced back to Virginia.[1]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One_handgun_a_month_law
also:
http://www.lcav.org/content/multiple_pu ... _sales.pdf
Thats your opinion.
I feel it is broken.
You might recall (I think you were in on the discussion about Giffords shooting)...
They used to have magazine limits to like 10-15 rounds. That freak in Arizona purchased his gun legally, and got off 30 rounds before someone tackled him. They were talking about re-establishing this law that would limit magazine capacities.. something that would've likely saved lives.. and been such a terrbile inconvenience for the responsible gun owners to have to reload at the range... :roll:
if it has been changed/added to 17 times then it is not perfect. it has been changed to reflect the changing times. that is why they call it a "living document" because it changes over time, as the people in our government see fit.
to answer your first question, Article V of the Constitution spells out the processes by which amendments can be proposed and ratified.
those can be found
http://usgovinfo.about.com/od/usconstit ... tamend.htm
so no, those people you listed can not change it alone.
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
That policy is your opinion and I disagree also. The anti-gun left never lets a crisis go to waste.
No kidding.
Thank you NRA flier. Where do I sign up and how much do I have to pay the lobbyists?
True, it is my opinion, and please excuse me for feeling that an update to a law might have saved the life of an innocent 9 year old that was needlessly murdered...So you'd rather have the ability to shoot off 30+ rounds for convenience than possibly save lives.. I get it, nevermind.
Keep clinging to the past America. Meanwhile the rest of the world will bypass you. It really is the bible thumpers and Republicans that hold America back. It's such a beautiful country. It's really too bad.
Edit: And doesn't the constitution have a bunch of amendments? If it was so great, why all the need for amendments?
"Hear me, my chiefs!
I am tired; my heart is
sick and sad. From where
the sun stands I will fight
no more forever."
Chief Joseph - Nez Perce