Here come the anti gun people.......

[Lady Quagga]

It happens in increments, and is, and has been happening for some time. Freedoms are being lost at an alarming rate. And if there is an attempt at neutering the second amendment, it should scream at you that the time indeed, is now...

The "they're comin' to get our guns" argument failed 18 years ago, and will likely fail again if used now.

Should this turn into the gun-control debate I expect it to, some salient points can be made:

1. Millions of Americans, many of them owners of high-capacity semi-automatics, woke up every day and went to bed every night this year, without engaging in a single firearms-related crime.

2. This tragedy points to another underlying but frequently ignored truth - that there are in this country people suffering from mental instability and emotional despair, and we have done nothing to help them or address the driving motivations behind their violent actions.

3. That an incident such as the recent massacre, while tragic, should not be used as a political opportunity to further divide this nation, regardless of which side of the gun-control issue you stand on.

[HawgZWylde]

Pro-gun advocates aren't doing themselves any favors by regurgitating walls of text from sites like "What Really Happened".

If this is the tactic pro-gun folks intend to use in the upcoming gun control debate, they will very quickly end up on the losing side, with no one to blame but themselves.

Doesn't matter where the quotes came from, just the fact that the quotes are true. I did attempt spacing, but every time I posted, they reformatted without spacing. Ah well.

One of the many tactics. So few actually understand why the second amendment was created, they must be educated of it's true intent. Our public education system surely doesn't do it. So what is wrong with that?

[HawgZWylde]

The "they're comin' to get our guns" argument failed 18 years ago, and will likely fail again if used now.

Should this turn into the gun-control debate I expect it to, some salient points can be made:

1. Millions of Americans, many of them owners of high-capacity semi-automatics, woke up every day and went to bed every night this year, without engaging in a single firearms-related crime.

2. This tragedy points to another underlying but frequently ignored truth - that there are in this country people suffering from mental instability and emotional despair, and we have done nothing to help them or address the driving motivations behind their violent actions.

3. That an incident such as the recent massacre, while tragic, should not be used as a political opportunity to further divide this nation, regardless of which side of the gun-control issue you stand on.

Different situation and political climate now Quagga. We've just had Obamacare shoved down our throats, and a we have a president and an administration that admittedly wants to "fundamentally change" America. That "fundamental change" has so far gone against the grain of the founders intents. Americans are rightfully concerned, and angry. Many on the left are calling for a complete ban on semi auto's. That isn't sitting well with the silent majority.

I do agree with your 3 suggested talking points...

[gamekiller]

1st off, Washington wasn't the first president and definitely not one of the founders...he was #9...john hanson was the first

Freedom? Yeah right!!! What good have guns really done us?

And second and better yet more importantly:

[HawgZWylde]

1st off, Washington wasn't the first president and definitely not one of the founders...he was #9...john hanson was the first

Freedom? Yeah right!!! What good have guns really done us?

And second and better yet more importantly:

Not quite, in November 1781, Hanson became the first President of the Continental Congress to be elected for an annual term as specified in the Articles of Confederation, although Samuel Huntington and Thomas McKean had served in that office after the ratification of the Articles. Under the Articles of Confederation, the United States had no executive branch; the President of Congress was a mostly ceremonial position within the Confederation Congress, but the office did require Hanson to handle a good deal of correspondence and sign official documents. Hanson found the work tedious and wished to resign, but his departure would have left Congress without a quorum to select a successor, and so, out of a sense of duty, he remained in office.

And under those founding fathers what was this nation called then? Siberia of the Americas? Sorry pal, there was no nation in those times. Those men were Tribal leaders of hunters and gatherers. There was not an educated civilized society of any kind in those days in North America...

[gamekiller]

There was not an educated civilized society of any kind in those days in North America...

Ohhhhhh you mean like we are today?? Im pretty sure the natives didnt need the settlers help however...

To each their own son, but dont dance around pissing on my leg, telling me to look at your rain dance

[Lady Quagga]

Different situation and political climate now Quagga. We've just had Obamacare shoved down our throats, and a we have a president and an administration that admittedly wants to "fundamentally change" America. That "fundamental change" has so far gone against the grain of the founders intents. Americans are rightfully concerned, and angry. Many on the left are calling for a complete ban on semi auto's. That isn't sitting well with the silent majority.

On the contrary, you will find the situation and political climate even more polarized than in '94, and hence more hostile towards gun owners.

This country is politically split, right down the middle, on many issues. The notion of a "silent minority" which quietly supports one side or the other, is a pleasant sentiment. It is also wrong. If you were somehow able to get the apathetic citizenry to have their political voices heard, you'd find that they would be evenly split, with no clear advantage for either side. Over one hundred years of election statistics bears this opinion out. You mention "founders' intent" and "fundamental change". These are political catchphrases which are meaningless and tired, regardless of which political party uses them. The birth and rise of America consists of a series of fundamental changes, both good and bad. At the same time, the founding fathers could not possibly have anticipated the nation or world in which we live in - though many of the economic and social policies they enacted had far-reaching and lasting consequences for this country - both beneficial and disastrous. What I find particularly amusing is the good guy badge both Republicans and Democrats try to affix to themselves, especially when voicing their opposition of "the other side".

Doesn't matter where the quotes came from, just the fact that the quotes are true. I did attempt spacing, but every time I posted, they reformatted without spacing. Ah well.

One of the many tactics. So few actually understand why the second amendment was created, they must be educated of it's true intent. Our public education system surely doesn't do it. So what is wrong with that?

Most of the quotes you copied and pasted are political opinions only. I am not arguing that there isn't sound reasoning behind many of those opinions, or a good deal of historical background to support those opinions. The point (once again) is, you aren't legitimizing your point of view by flooding out the opinions of others - particularly by regurgitating walls of text sourced from an inflammatory, alarmist, conspiratorial website like "What Really Happened".

[HawgZWylde]

On the contrary, you will find the situation and political climate even more polarized than in '94, and hence more hostile towards gun owners.

This country is politically split, right down the middle, on many issues. The notion of a "silent minority" which quietly supports one side or the other, is a pleasant sentiment. It is also wrong. If you were somehow able to get the apathetic citizenry to have their political voices heard, you'd find that they would be evenly split, with no clear advantage for either side. Over one hundred years of election statistics bears this opinion out. You mention "founders' intent" and "fundamental change". These are political catchphrases which are meaningless and tired, regardless of which political party uses them. The birth and rise of America consists of a series of fundamental changes, both good and bad. At the same time, the founding fathers could not possibly have anticipated the nation or world in which we live in - though many of the economic and social policies they enacted had far-reaching and lasting consequences for this country - both beneficial and disastrous. What I find particularly amusing is the good guy badge both Republicans and Democrats try to affix to themselves, especially when voicing their opposition of "the other side".



Most of the quotes you copied and pasted are political opinions only. I am not arguing that there isn't sound reasoning behind many of those opinions, or a good deal of historical background to support those opinions. The point (once again) is, you aren't legitimizing your point of view by flooding out the opinions of others - particularly by regurgitating walls of text sourced from an inflammatory, alarmist, conspiratorial website like "What Really Happened".

Most of the quotes I copied and pasted are from the founders and those around them, and a few from more modern sources. And who gives a "F" where they came from. I Googled "quotes from the founders regarding the 2nd amendment", and that's what came up. Never saw the site before that, so? It gave me what I wanted.

I don't really care about the opinions of those who seek to disarm the American people. And I certainly don't really care what you think of me. You want to try to portray me as some kind of extremist, that's your problem. I'm a right of center American citizen and proud of it. No extremist as you wish to portray me. Those opinions you so much want to ridicule are from the very men who founded our great nation, so if you don't like that, tough s**t.

One more thing Quagga, nearly 100 million eligible voters do not participate in the elections, so there is no mandate as the socialist progressives wish you to believe. And yes, regarding the second amendment, there is a silent majority. Many democrats, like my 4 brothers-in-laws in Minnesota are staunchly pro second amendment, as are all their democrat friends, and will stand right along side of me in defending it.

Merry Christmas Lady Quagga...

[HawgStalker]

I suggest you read the previous post. It will explain that I have all the facts and I don't spout of at the mouth. What never seems to change is your ability to read information and not understand what you read. Perhaps some more remedial education would help with that...

Lol!!! You're a joke and I don't need more education to understand the constitution or laws of MY country.... Or to read the posts of some DUMB**** liberal much like yourself!!! Merry Christmas and Happy New Year

[Lady Quagga]

Most of the quotes I copied and pasted are from the founders and those around them, and a few from more modern sources. And who gives a "F" where they came from. I Googled "quotes from the founders regarding the 2nd amendment", and that's what came up. Never saw the site before that, so? It gave me what I wanted.

I don't really care about the opinions of those who seek to disarm the American people. And I certainly don't really care what you think of me. You want to try to portray me as some kind of extremist, that's your problem. I'm a right of center American citizen and proud of it. No extremist as you wish to portray me. Those opinions you so much want to ridicule are from the very men who founded our great nation, so if you don't like that, tough s**t.

By copying and pasting walls of text from that website, you painted yourself as an extremist who patronizes extremist websites like it. Do you think someone who is less sympathetic to the pro-gun cause would be any less critical? Those with an anti-gun agenda will be much more prepared - and much more ruthless - than I, and will scrutinize everything pro-gun folks have to say. Ham-handed responses like yours only give them ammunition (pun intended). If you don't like that, touch s**t.

One more thing Quagga, nearly 100 million eligible voters do not participate in the elections, so there is no mandate as the socialist progressives wish you to believe. And yes, regarding the second amendment, there is a silent majority. Many democrats, like my 4 brothers-in-laws in Minnesota are staunchly pro second amendment, as are all their democrat friends, and will stand right along side of me in defending it.

The mandate exists, whether you and I like it or not. It may not be an overwhelming mandate - a point I made quite clear in my last post on this thread - but it exists nonetheless. And when I was referring to the silent majority, I was referring to this country's political ideology in general, not the 2nd Amendment. I stand by what I said.

Back to the subject at hand....

As to the 2nd Amendment, there is every indication to suggest that a majority of the population would be amenable to addition gun control measures, and would embrace those measure if they were served up as "reasonable compromises". When anti-gun groups present their proposals, they will make their case to the centrists, and they will present themselves as wanting to make "sane and rational" changes to our gun control laws. This upcoming debate will transcend political ideologies - but that does not necessarily bode well for pro-gun citizens.