Page 52 of 59 FirstFirst ... 2425051525354 ... LastLast
Results 511 to 520 of 587

Thread: Are we making a rational argument?

  1. #511
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    SW Louisiana
    Quote Originally Posted by Palmguy View Post
    Need is absolutely irrelevant when it comes to the exercise of constitutional rights by the people. Need is totally relevant when it comes to the government restricting those rights.
    I agree. However, as of this time the Court has so far rejected the idea that conducting a background check is in any way a restriction of a constitutional right.
    "PLAN FOR YOUR TRAINING TO BE A REFLECTION OF REAL LIFE INSTEAD OF HOPING THAT REAL LIFE WILL BE A REFLECTION OF YOUR TRAINING!"

  2. #512
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    SW Louisiana
    Quote Originally Posted by Spr1 View Post
    Hitler used gun control laws, previously enacted to keep Nazi's and Communist's from possessing guns, to disarm his nation and the Jewish people. He did not need new laws. Yes, I brought Hitler into the discussion.......
    Yes, you did, and incorrectly at that. Hitler did not disarm his nation. He disarmed parts of the population but actually weakened or removed other gun control measures on most of the citizens.

    It is not rational to give the federal government this power over us, especially when the left has so openly stated their ultimate goals.
    What power are they getting that is not already present and used quite a bit? Lots of places don't let you sell at a gunshow without a background check. A smaller number require universal background checks, but that doesn't seem to have created some great problems that I'm aware of.
    "PLAN FOR YOUR TRAINING TO BE A REFLECTION OF REAL LIFE INSTEAD OF HOPING THAT REAL LIFE WILL BE A REFLECTION OF YOUR TRAINING!"

  3. #513
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    SE Wisconsin
    Quote Originally Posted by cclaxton View Post
    ...So far I have not heard a rational argument against registration...
    I would argue that I have not seen a rational argument FOR registration. At best registration inconveniences law abiding gun owners and at worst can lead down the path to confiscation. Here in Las Vegas all handguns need to registered with the Sheriff's department. When pressed for details about how many criminal investigations the registry help solved, the department could not provide any details. Here is some additional information about how registration works in Sweden.

    When you look at the history of the effectiveness of gun registration in regards to preventing violent crime vs the amount of times that the registry has been abused to restrict people's right, it appears that registration causes more harm than good.

  4. #514
    Member cclaxton's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Vienna, Va
    Quote Originally Posted by Spr1 View Post
    Hitler used gun control laws, previously enacted to keep Nazi's and Communist's from possessing guns, to disarm his nation and the Jewish people. He did not need new laws. Yes, I brought Hitler into the discussion.......

    SCOTUS is one more bad appointment from being able to overturn the recent rulings.

    Sure, the average federal worker is a great person. They are not in charge.

    It is not rational to give the federal government this power over us, especially when the left has so openly stated their ultimate goals.
    We don't live in Pre-WW2 Hitler's Germany. We live in America, a democratic government with balances of powers. That is not the same.

    SCOTUS must have a compelling reason to overrule a precedent. And, since this is a recent ruling, it would not even be considered without a legislative action to overturn it. Today's Congress, including Democrats, are not going to pass a law allowing confiscation of weapons from law abiding citizens. It ain't gonna happen. This is a FEAR, not anything based on a rational basis.

    Whether we like it or not, SCOTUS has ruled that the legislatures have the power to make legislation to register weapons and that is the law of the land. We, The People, through our representatives can either enact legislation that requires registration or we can take no action on registration. The government already has that power, and it comes from the Constitution whether they choose to legislate it or not. Trying to debate what the SCOTUS should do might be an interesting debate for Constitutional Lawyers, but it doesn't change the powers currently enabled. We could take that power away through a Constitutional Amendment....you really advocating for that?

    CC
    That a well-regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the proper, natural, and safe defense of a free state;

  5. #515
    Member ezthumper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Houston Texas area
    Quote Originally Posted by cclaxton View Post
    We don't live in Pre-WW2 Hitler's Germany. We live in America, a democratic government with balances of powers. That is not the same.
    However, we do live in an era where you still have a countries that uses the media to condition and mislead the people, make policy with out the support of the people and essentially bankrupt the country with out regard of the people.

    How many can you name?

  6. #516
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Northern Virginia
    Quote Originally Posted by cclaxton View Post
    Whether we like it or not, SCOTUS has ruled that the legislatures have the power to make legislation to register weapons and that is the law of the land.
    By "weapons" do you mean arms protected by the Second Amendment? If so, then which case are you referring to?

  7. #517
    Site Supporter Palmguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    NW Florida
    Quote Originally Posted by cclaxton View Post
    So what is the rational argument against a permanent record? Since SCOTUS has now declared that there is a Constitutional Right to own a firearm for your self defense, then why do we care? I can't think of a rational argument against it.

    Belief is normally not considered a rational basis.

    I disagree entirely. I live in the DC metro area and I know a lot of federal gov't workers. They are all honest, hard-working, and patriotic people. The policy-makers at the top, no matter what their political persuasion, are trying to do what they think is the right thing, although sometimes that is driven by ideology and belief and not rational basis. It is the ideologues who ruin it. We should let the government workers do their jobs because they know what works.

    We can find criminals and corruption and laziness, but those are the rare cases and exaggerated by the media and political partisans.

    So far I have not heard a rational argument against registration...it is all based on fear or belief and not any history or facts or basis.
    CC
    We don't implement controls due to the absence of an argument against it (though there are, most recently and from a practical perspective would be taking a look at our neighbor to the north), we do that because of a compelling argument in favor of it.

  8. #518
    Quote Originally Posted by cclaxton View Post
    We should let the government workers do their jobs because they know what works.
    Taken a commercial flight lately?
    Talked to anyone who can't repair their Hurricane Sandy-damaged home because FEMA won't let them?
    Talked to a vet about the wonderful care he or she gets from the VA?
    Been to the DMV?
    Are private-sector workers to blame for the fact that the cheapest insurance plan under Obamacare looks to have an annual cost of $20,000?

    The issue is not with the individual government workers, it's with the government.

    Albeit some of the individual workers make it worse.

  9. #519
    http://www.stephenhalbrook.com/article-nazilaw.pdf

    We have swirled so far down the drain of authoritarianism / socialism that our current position and further surrendering of basic liberties seems normal to many.

    Our founding fathers understood the inherent nature of centralized power pretty well.

    When we hit bottom it won't be pretty.

    I'm out of this thread.

  10. #520
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Off Camber
    Quote Originally Posted by cclaxton View Post
    I live in the DC metro area and I know a lot of federal gov't workers. They are all honest, hard-working, and patriotic people.
    You're not looking hard enough. And I'm not sure how you can figure out how hard working people are when you're not seeing them actually working.

    I know, and have worked with, some extremely lazy/unmotivated and downright dishonest government workers. I can think of at least 2 people I've worked for, directly, that lied more than they told the truth.

    I can think of one director that loved to spend money at one particular vendor, and in his position there was very little oversight, all so he could stay in the "in" with them, probably just so he could get a job there when his federal time is up.

    Quote Originally Posted by cclaxton View Post
    We should let the government workers do their jobs because they know what works.
    I don't even know where to begin with this.

    Every government agency I've worked in has stayed pretty close to the 90/10 rule. 90% of the work is done by 10% of the employees.
    Last edited by JV_; 02-15-2013 at 01:00 PM.

User Tag List

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •