Confiscate, Confiscate, Confiscate

[danielost 8,877]

I don't share your pessimism Daniel. My vote counts. In fact I am at my polling station now about to vote.

I didn't say your vote didn't count but before you vote. Consider who will be left with guns if you vote them down. I personally do not own a gun and never will. But, thugs don't care about laws.

[Clarakore 3,454]

Guns were not on the ballot today. Back home now, all done, have to love living in the city with some thing so close and all.

I have owned enough firearms, bought my first one in the pre-ban Clinton-era, bought things that eventually were banned.

I know gun safety, been to the range, live in an area with decreasing gang violence, have seen it get worse, now better, have seen others gather around a victim of gun violence and saw with my own eyes the effects of it, live three houses down where someone was taken just last year, down the block three teens were gunned down last year too, and there is more throughout my many years, so if guns were on the ballot I would make an informed decision.

Just because it is not the decision gun nuts agree with they will claim my opinion is "ill-informed". Well they can think what they like now. So many stereotypes but their reality is not like ours, we have faced gun violence in the city, we base our decision on our experience and what we think is right just as much as you, so some of us will agree when it is time for reform, you don't have to but that is why we have a democracy which I believe in.

I personally do not own a gun and never will. But, thugs don't care about laws.

Well this is where we are different. Do you even live in an area with gangs as a problem? Those who do will not buy your alarmist argument.

I have seen my neighborhood improve so much. The things that decrease gangs are not more guns in the hands of citizens, it is things like better schools, better jobs, better parenting, and our city improving our area. They have, which is why I voted for our mayor again and a new city council person. These people make the difference, not guys online complaining.

Edited May 11, 2013 by Leave Britney alone!

[Kowalski 5,771]

There has been a great deal of discussion in the United States about the Constitution — despite the fact that it was promulgated over two centuries ago — and whether it is relevant to contemporary America. I’d like to remark briefly on this.

The founders of the United States were not merely technicians setting up an administrative framework and a set of rules. They had pondered long and hard over the lessons of long-term history as to why republics had always seemed to fail and how governments had tended over time to become tyrannical.

http://rubinreports....atters-its.html

The Constitution was ratified by 1790 after the Articles of Confederation were scrapped.

In 1848, the liberal progressive’s Bible — Karl Marx’s “The Communist Manifesto” — was published. So age is of little importance.

Some of the founders participated in the English institution of slavery, others did not. Business success favored a few and eluded others. Religion was important to and guided many of them. One thing they did agree about is that a big central government was tyrannical at best.

The dream of man ruling himself was set forth on parchment.

http://www.blufftont...nt#.UY61iHaUy8Z

Edited May 11, 2013 by Sky Scanner
Added links from which the text was taken. Plus shortened text.

[Clarakore 3,454]

Most of us in the city will vote for progress. You can feel free to vote another way.

[F3SS 18,662]

Nobody wants a war and nobody is advocating one. I was quite clear of the implications that would bring. We are simply stating that an armed citizenry is all that is needed to keep overreaching tyrants at bay such as the ones you hear say "we need a bill that will confiscate confiscate confiscate" in the op. State confiscation is one thing that may go without a real fight. Federal confiscation will bring about a real fight. Progressives and big government need to stay the hell out of our lives and quit telling US what's best for US. You don't get to do that and you aren't the majority either. It quite more than a few of US who don't want to be infringed upon any further. You're ilk makes up 20% of the country. I'd say another 15% know why they vote left. The others don't have any clue why they voted left besides that it was the cool thing to do or someone told them they should. Everyone I know who voted for Obama in the last couple elections had not one good reason why. The answers ranged from "my college educated brother said I should" to "everyone else was doing it" and "the other guy is an ahole". Wow, talk about informed. The truth is your side has no real support and your mad because more than half the country doesn't think like you. The only support you have on gun control is the open ended extremely broad question of wether or not people support background checks. Other than that you have nothing. You're fight against guns has had the exact opposite effect you so desire and that is record breaking guns and ammo sales and that doesn't include non-owners and possibly future owners like myself who don't own but sure as hell support the right to and will stand side by side with all who wish to defend such rights. We have a constitution and that is too freaking bad. You want to enact change and see where the public stands? Get an amendment passed and stop dcking around with bs laws and regulations that only serve as lip service because there are already a ton of laws and regulations and a few more wont make a difference. You progressives are the ones picking a fight but we will not be complacent to your fundamental changes. Either do it right through amendments or stay the hell out of our lives. AAAARRRRGGGGHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!

[Clarakore 3,454]

Progressive have a say in our democracy like everyone else. We are all involved in each others lives.

We don't seem mad at all. We base our opinions on scholarship most of all combined with our real world experience.

Those who seem mad are conspiracy theorists and those demanding progressives should stay our of their lives.

We like the direction the country is going. The anger is not ours.

Edited May 11, 2013 by Leave Britney alone!

[F3SS 18,662]

Most of us in the city will vote for progress. You can feel free to vote another way.

How about we take a walk on the hemline of any major city but not downtown. There you will see what liberal progress looks like. It's a run down hellhole full of once great homes and communities all sprayed with graffiti and big homes that sell for less than most cars. I know I know it's not about speed but direction. Well this type of progress is going at a snails pace and a regressive direction. Your hearts in the right place but Your policies don't work. They just don't and it's delusional to think otherwise.

Liberalism always generates the exact opposite of its stated intent.

[Professor Buzzkill 2,585]

Most of us in the city will vote for progress. You can feel free to vote another way.

Most of us in the city will vote for progress. You can feel free to vote another way.

In other words, you havent learned from history

[Clarakore 3,454]

How about we take a walk on the hemline of any major city but not downtown. There you will see what liberal progress looks like. It's a run down hellhole full of once great homes and communities all sprayed with graffiti and big homes that sell for less than most cars. I know I know it's not about speed but direction. Well this type of progress is going at a snails pace and a regressive direction. Your hearts in the right place but Your policies don't work. They just don't and it's delusional to think otherwise.

Liberalism always generates the exact opposite of its stated intent.

Our city is nothing like that. There are problems and there have always been problems but things are improving in all quarters.

The run down homes which were once great are in areas being gentrified and those homes are being restored.

And once more, progressivism is not liberalism. We might vote on some of the same things but the approach is different.

Edited May 11, 2013 by Leave Britney alone!

[Michelle 20,989]

Majority rule eh? Okay let's put it this way. Majority decided to kick all African Americans out of U.S. as a metaphor, the tally came up 51 - 49 with majority in favor of deporting all African Americans regardless if they were born here or not. Now you are faced with a situation where mob rule is taking over and causing a unjust and unfair decision to be forces on the other half of the nation. That is what you are rooting for... it is happening right now, with our 2nd amendment being thrown onto the table and being ripped to shreds by ill-informed voters much like yourself who thinks his opinion weighs more than others and his ideals should be thrust upon others of this great nation. That my good sir is infringing upon someone's freedom and free-will. This is exactly the opposite of what America stands for...

That was a rhetorical question, wasn't it? You didn't think you would get an honest, straightforward answer, did you?

[Clarakore 3,454]

There has been a great deal of discussion in the United States about the Constitution — despite the fact that it was promulgated over two centuries ago — and whether it is relevant to contemporary America. I’d like to remark briefly on this.

The founders of the United States were not merely technicians setting up an administrative framework and a set of rules. They had pondered long and hard over the lessons of long-term history as to why republics had always seemed to fail and how governments had tended over time to become tyrannical.

From this study, debate, and analysis, their most important conclusion was that human beings could not be trusted with power. Those who had power — at least many or most of them — would misuse it to make themselves wealthy; to order around others; to hold onto office; to increase their authority; and to benefit themselves, their friends, and their supporters.

What was the solution? Their unanimous conclusion was that two safeguards were needed:

1. To divide power among as many institutions as would be possible without paralyzing government. On the federal level this meant there was a division among the executive, legislative, and judicial branches. Each of them had a large measure of independence and could check the others if they went too far.

Equally, power was divided among the federal government and independent state and local authorities. (This is called checks and balances. See http://www.newworlde...ks_and_balances )

2. To limit government, leaving the maximum amount of freedom in the hands of individuals.

These two strategies were tremendous innovations. While in need of some adjustment over time, this was basically to define the precise boundaries in each case, not to transform fundamentally the structure as a whole. The history of the past two centuries — and especially the twentieth century — showed just how right they were in this plan.

For example, Communism came up with the idea of being even “more” democratic, placing power in the hands of the “proletariat.” But as the founders of America could have told them, in the end this just meant giving absolute power to those who claimed to be the representatives of the masses, and in particular a man named Joseph Stalin.

The Constitution was ratified by 1790 after the Articles of Confederation were scrapped.

In 1848, the liberal progressive’s Bible — Karl Marx’s “The Communist Manifesto” — was published. So age is of little importance.

Some of the founders participated in the English institution of slavery, others did not. Business success favored a few and eluded others. Religion was important to and guided many of them. One thing they did agree about is that a big central government was tyrannical at best.

The dream of man ruling himself was set forth on parchment.

Karl Marx on the other hand failed at business and basically lived off of the entrepreneur Fredrick Engels. Karl, an atheist, hated religion. Both agreed that people should not be left to make their own decision. Marx died destitute.

As doctrines, communism and all its sister “isms” have enslaved and murdered tens of millions. In every case they are oppressive and destructive to life and liberty.

Our capitalist system has raised millions out of poverty and depravation. Many a free son and daughter have given their lives to free others around the world. The freedom we enjoy has been shared by only 5 percent of civilization.

Hence America is historically out of place.

Given a preference, being a free sovereign American citizen is preferable to liberal progressive subjugation.

http://rubinreports....atters-its.html

http://www.blufftont...nt#.UY61iHaUy8Z

Just to inform others, part of what is above was written by someone who lives in Israel.

Few of us are interested in allowing those in Israel dictate the domestic affairs of our own nation. It is bad enough they hijack our foreign policy.

The other part was from some OP ed from some guy name Paul in South Carolina.

Of course progressives prefer to trust in academia but not everyone has to.

In other words, you havent learned from history

?

Edited May 11, 2013 by Leave Britney alone!

[F3SS 18,662]

You can resort to the classic definition if you want but liberalism and progressivism are one in the same in the modern USA. The more you guys try to help the worse things become mainly through dependence because nothing you put on the plate is an attempt to get people to fix their own lives. They are all attempts to fix it for them.

[Clarakore 3,454]

Oddly one who claims neither liberalism or progressivism will attempt to explain to us what they are.

[F3SS 18,662]

Doesn't matter who wrote that or where. It's all true.

[F3SS 18,662]

Oddly one who claims neither liberalism or progressivism will attempt to explain to us what they are.

I'm not going to conduct an academic study of a post like you do. I understand quite well and those who know me here know that I do. I've been posting here in the politics for quite sometime and you've just recently showed up. I don't feel the need to explain my every thought and word and I've discussed many things many times over the years. Just stick around and you'll figure me out but I think you already have and you won't beat me or anyone else on my side by making remarks suggesting we don't know what we are talking about. You can take the college lecture approach. I'll continue to talk like a real person and just be myself.

[Kowalski 5,771]

Just to inform others, all the above was written by someone who lives in Israel.

http://rubinreports....atters-its.html

Few of us are interested in allowing those in Israel dictate the domestic affairs of our own nation. It is bad enough they hijack our foreign policy.

First off I got the first part that I posted from: http://pjmedia.com/blog/why-the-constitution-is-relevant-today/

The second part was from: http://www.blufftontoday.com/bluffton-opinion/2011-07-24/constitution-still-relevant#.UY6sLjAo5oM

I meant to post my links, but as I am posting on my kindle, I was having some trouble...

And does it really matter who wrote the articles? When anyone says or writes something that you don't like, you attack the person's credibility or in this case, a person's country.

This has nothing to do with foreign policy or Isreal it's about brain dead liberals who think our constitution is out of date, just because their Jesus Christ, Lord and Saviour Obama and his cronies say so. I honestly think that to become a liberal you have to loose half your brain cells first, because for any American to sit there and say our Constitution is outdated and not relevant is just beyond stupidity.

You then back up your views with some type of pysdeo scientific talk, and act like you are so much more intelligent then everyone else. I'm a very intelligent person, but I don't feel the need to spout 18 letter words to make myself seem more intelligent than others.

[Clarakore 3,454]

That does not sound very sensible to me. In either case I prefer to discuss topics and not fellow posters.

Have a good afternoon.

[Kowalski 5,771]

That does not sound very sensible to me. In either case I prefer to discuss topics and not fellow posters.

Have a good afternoon.

Hey, you were the one that posted this little beauty:

Just to inform others, all the above was written by someone who lives in Israel.

Few of us are interested in allowing those in Israel dictate the domestic affairs of our own nation. It is bad enough they hijack our foreign policy.

The other part was from some OP ed from some guy name Paul in South Carolina.

Of course progressives prefer to trust in academia but not everyone has to

This is exactly what I'm talking about. I was talking about how the Constitution is still very relevant today. I posted two very good articles that I read online, which I thought were very well written. Then you attack the people who wrote it with some nonsense about it not being "academia".... Do you know anything about the history behind WHY the Constitution was written? I don't think you do.

[Michelle 20,989]

That does not sound very sensible to me. In either case I prefer to discuss topics and not fellow posters.

What a load of bull! You may not address anyone personally, you simply rationalize your contempt for an entire group of people who don't agree with you. Whether you like it or not that makes you a bigot.

[Sir Wearer of Hats 31,403]

Majority rule eh? Okay let's put it this way. Majority decided to kick all African Americans out of U.S. as a metaphor, the tally came up 51 - 49 with majority in favor of deporting all African Americans regardless if they were born here or not. Now you are faced with a situation where mob rule is taking over and causing a unjust and unfair decision to be forces on the other half of the nation. That is what you are rooting for...

Wasn't Lincoln's Emancipation order contrary to the vox populi? I'm sure I saw it in a doco once.

[Sir Wearer of Hats 31,403]

Progressive have a say in our democracy like everyone else. We are all involved in each others lives.

Quite right.

However, some people's involvement in other people's lives is to tell them that they're ignorant, or feeble-minded or just plain wrong and to tread heavily on their beliefs.

[danielost 8,877]

In other words, you havent learned from history

Recent history, like the last four years.

You can not tax and spend your way out of a recession. The only out is for the people to have more money in their pockets to spend, not the government.

[preacherman76 13,495]

A few don't want America in line with the rest of the world.

The rest of us vote otherwise.

Most of us do not want bloodshed here. The extremist view is marginalized to the lunatic fringe the more speak of rebellion. Those are the ones who want a domestic war. It is not going to happen.

The rest of us prefer the rule of law.

Let me get this right. You basicaly want to throw away the constitution and turn us all into globalists, then say the ones who dont are extremists looking for a rebellion? Hey idiot, YOU are the extremist, YOU are the one rebelling. LOL, then go on to tell us about the rule of law???????? My goodness

[preacherman76 13,495]

The conspiracy theorists who believe only they know about guns and the rest of us are misinformed are not going to present a winning argument.

The public will decide this issue.

That is what democracy is.

We dont live in a democracy. Our government was set up so the crowd couldnt take away the rights of the individual. Democracy is 2 wolfs and a sheep voting on whats for dinner.

[Frank Merton 17,411]

I suppose it's a bit dangerous for someone like myself to get into a discussion on a board mostly of Americans about democracy, but I would suggest that what you are taught all your lives is really a myth, that your society is no freer than others and your democracy actually doesn't function very well. Most of you seem to see this when it comes to specific things -- wasted tax money, all sorts of injustices, but don't see it in general.

The role of the United States in history has been and continues to be important, but I think it is in decline. The structures created to govern thirteen colonies clustered along the Atlantic seacoast don't work for a global power, and up until recently the powers that rule have seen this, but now there seems to be a reversion to an ideology of the Founders that is really plainly silly.