Does the Second Amendment, belong to the Citizens of the United States?

TKDB

@CYDdharta

You can keep asking your pro gun extremists question, because CYDdharta, doesn't have a defense for those Police Officers, kids, teenagers, senior citizens, parents, and students alike for being killed by criminals, and offenders with their illegal guns, because the Second Amendment as its written, failed those citizens, and they are the same words, that you're using to defend your own guns with CYDdharta.

@CYDdharta

You can ask your question, all you want, because the Second Amendment as its written, doesn't support the DNA of your question:

"And once again, how would you get criminals, who are already prohibited from owning a gun of any sort, to legally account for their weapons and admit they're breaking the law?"

CYDdharta

TKDB said:

You can keep asking your pro gun extremists question, because CYDdharta, doesn't have a defense for those Police Officers, kids, teenagers, senior citizens, parents, and students alike for being killed by criminals, and offenders with their illegal guns, because the Second Amendment as its written, failed those citizens, and they are the same words, that you're using to defend your own guns with CYDdharta.

You've made it quite clear that you don't have any answers as to how to keep Police Officers, kids, teenagers, senior citizens, parents, and students alike for being killed by criminals, and offenders with their illegal guns either.

TKDB

@John_C_87

Show the American Public, where your specific pro gun rhetoric, is covered by the Second Amendment, as it's currently written?

Where's you Evidence?

Does the Second Amendment as its written, support your arguments?

Yep.

Prove it John, because your opinion, isn't a published part of the Second Amendment, is it?

(Does the Second Amendment protect gun ownership?)

"Yep, Again this is not the right question as not all gun owners understand the basic principle behind the protection and how it has been placed in constitution."

Prove it John, because your opinion, isn't a published part of the Second Amendment, is it?

(Can Congress change the second amendment?)

"Wrong question, can a congressional representative legally and illegally amend American constitution law held by United State? The answer to both questions is still yes, we can do both. Both can also be proven by preservation of American United State Constitution."

Prove it John, because your above perception, isn't a published part of the Second Amendment, is it?

(Does the 2nd Amendment have limits?)

"Yes the legal limit of verbal and written interpretation is set by basic principle and legal precedent. We must presume an Amendment was created by the people legally. The immunity of such state is not united by the creator, it is held by those who must recreate as creator. We know not all unions are perfect as a united state. Ever."

Prove it, John, because your above perception, isn't a published part of the Second Amendment, is it?

"No state can take it away your Second Amendment rights. But they can place limits on it. The way most states regulate guns is through licensing requirements and bans on certain guns within a given class. Those kinds of limits have generally been upheld by courts and Heller doesn't stop them.Aug 30, 2012"

"There are state's of American united state constitutional law which describe details of independence. The 2nd amendment is a change made by American constitution to common law. In basic principle it may be proven we never had a American united state constitutional right."

States do not, as to date effect the American United State Constitution by legislative actions, This is my Presidential state of the Union. They for the most part address limits by law only against a persons Independence under the American Declaration of Independence, this independence is made form England’s parliament government also Known as common Law."

Prove it, John?

@John_C_87

Let me make myself clear to you:

My arguments are based on what the Second Amendment says, and on what it doesn't protect.

The Second Amendment, is an easy to read, paragraph of word's, being that there's not much to it.

But what is substantial to the perceptions over the Second Amendment, as it's currently written?

Is how, some of the NRA, views it through the lens of its own political stance?

Is how, some of the pro gun extremists, views it through the lens of their own gun extremist, political stance?

And how, some of the Far Right Pro Gun supporting crowd, views it through the lens of their own political stances as well?

TKDB

@CYDdharta

I asked you this question;

You can keep asking your pro gun extremists question, because CYDdharta, doesn't have a defense for those Police Officers, kids, teenagers, senior citizens, parents, and students alike for being killed by criminals, and offenders with their illegal guns, because the Second Amendment as its written, failed those citizens, and they are the same words, that you're using to defend your own guns with CYDdharta.

And what does @CYDdharta do, he turns the question around om me, as if that tactic, that comes from the same mind of his, that he's shyly using, to defend his pro gun extremists stance with?

@CYDdharta

You're educating me plenty, on how you view the rest of the Public, through the very lens of your own mind?

"You've made it quite clear that you don't have any answers as to how to keep Police Officers, kids, teenagers, senior citizens, parents, and students alike for being killed by criminals, and offenders with their illegal guns either."

I do have an answer @CYDdharta, and you balked at it, because apparently, your guns, appear, to be more important to you, than the lives of those citizens, who have been killed, or maimed by thousands of the gun violence crimes, that have been committed against those Police Officers, kids, teenagers, senior citizens, parents, and students alike for being killed by criminals, and offenders with their illegal guns, because the Second Amendment as its written, failed those citizens, and they are the same words, that you're using to defend your own guns with CYDdharta, right?

Wrong or right?

My arguments are based on what the Second Amendment says, and on what it doesn't protect.

So the DNA of your argument, falls, because the Second Amendment, doesn't protect, those mass shooters gun violence crimes, does it?

And it also doesn't provide protection for the illegal guns, in the United States, now does it, that the millions of criminals, and offenders, have im their possession now does it?

Because the Second Amendment, as its written, has caused a gross amount of guns to be available in the United States, 400 million plus, and no one knows, how many illegal guns that there are in the U.S.?

@CYDdharta

I've seen two grown men walking around inside of a Wal-Mart before, on two separate occasions, one of them had their gun holstered, but he didn't look like he had it altogether, and when people noticed his gun, they avoided him.

The other guy, had his gun casually stowed in his front pocket, and kept pulling his pants up, because his belt was loose, and I guess that was the fashion statement, he appeared to be making?

Or his gun, could have been a pellet gun, but who can really say?

Maybe he was making a silent statement, he's packing a gun, so you might want to leave his individual self alone?

Those two individual gun owners, helped to educate my position, being that I'm pro family, and pro Public safety, in the face of the Second Amendment as its currently written, because there is Zero accountability for all of the guns in the United States.

John_C_87

@TKDB ;

No wonder, the United States, has a gun accountability problem?

This is true but when the basic principle is lethal force how many of the gunshot victims had been armed with lethal force before being shot? When the public is not armed with a weight to bear in lethal force. They voluntarily gave up independent right to safety found in the American Declaration of Independence not united State constitutional right. Your grievance is in the amount of independence a group of people is allowed take away, not just for themselves but for others. While only those who wish to maintain American independence must face a higher cost to a liberty of higher safety.

For the record the issue with immigration is for medical safety which to is a issue of American independence and not constitutional crime. There was no evidence yet to a crime until law was created to provide evidence of a crime. Thus, the person has American united state constitutional rights.

John_C_87

@TKDB ;

Prove it John, because your opinion, isn't a published part of the Second Amendment, is it?

Correction prove it again John safety is a verbatim part of American Independence.

Yes, it is a published part of American Declaration of Independence, my opinion, as my opinion is based on basic principle so it is not a interpretation it is part of the specification made by words. The weight that we bear with all arms by united state is lethal force. Good and bad people alike share the weight of lethal force. The problem is safety was an issue of American Declaration of Independence, verbatim not American united State Constitution.

“unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”

“as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.”

Do people have prior knowledge that when refusing to carry the weight of lethal force the are inviting a higher risk of death to not only themselves but others?

http://www.ushistory.org/Declaration/document/

TKDB

@John_C_87

Your whole truth opinion is based on your opinion only.

And being, that I wouldn't trust your opinion, being that the Second Amendment, doesn't mention you specifically in it.

John_C_87

TKDB said:

@John_C_87

Your whole truth opinion is based on your opinion only.

And being, that I wouldn't trust your opinion, being that the Second Amendment, doesn't mention you specifically in it.

Your whole truth opinion is based on your opinion only.
Wrong!
Look the word safety is in the Declaration of Independence, and not just any declaration of Independence either it is the American united state Declaration of Independence.
Here is a link. http://www.ushistory.org/Declaration/document/

“as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.”
What is the name of this forum, Does the United State 2nd Constitutional Amendment belong to the citizens of the American United States? No, it belongs to the American Declaration of united state Independence.

And being, that I wouldn't trust your opinion, being that the Second Amendment, doesn't mention you specifically in it. It does by united state it simply does not single me out as I along with many others are mentioned by basic priciple.

TKDB

@Vaulk

@CYDdharta

@ZeusAres42

@Plaffelvohfen

@MayCaesar

What the Second Amendment says:

https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/second_amendment

"Second Amendment

The Second Amendment of the United States Constitution reads: "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

"Such language has created considerable debate regarding the Amendment's intended scope."

1) "On the one hand, some believe that the Amendment's phrase "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms" creates an individual constitutional right for citizens of the United States."

2) "Under this "individual right theory," the United States Constitution restricts legislative bodies from prohibiting firearm possession, or at the very least, the Amendment renders prohibitory and restrictive regulation presumptively unconstitutional."

3) "On the other hand, some scholars point to the prefatory language "a well regulated Militia" to argue that the Framers intended only to restrict Congress from legislating away a state's right to self-defense."

4) "Scholars have come to call this theory "the collective rights theory." A collective rights theory of the Second Amendment asserts that citizens do not have an individual right to possess guns and that local, state, and federal legislative bodies therefore possess the authority to regulate firearms without implicating a constitutional right."

I have read the Second Amendment, over and over, and over again because of what Nicholas Cruz, and Stephen Paddock, did.

https://abcnews-go-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/abcnews.go.com/amp/US/deadly-mass-shootings-month-2019/story?amp_js_v=a2&amp_gsa=1&id=63449799&usqp=mq331AQEKAFwAQ==#aoh=15670283526174&referrer=https://www.google.com&amp_tf=From %1$s&ampshare=https://abcnews.go.com/US/deadly-mass-shootings-month-2019/story?id=63449799 

From the article, below are some of the names, of various individuals who have committed gun violence crimes:

"Gary Martin, Dewayne Craddock, James Cloud, Anthony Watkins Jr, Terrance Wesley, Gerry Dean Zaragoza," along with the other names that are present in the article.

Here's what the Second Amendment doesn't do for Nicholas Cruz, Stephen Paddock, or the rest of the above names, it doesn't protect them, or the guns that they allegedly used to kill their victims with?

No where, in the Second Amendment as its currently written, does it state;

That any gun owner, or illegal gun owner, has the right to kill anyone, or infringe, on the Rights of their victims, by victimizing their victims, with their legal, or illegal guns.

But as stated before, my arguments are based on what the Second Amendment says, and on what it doesn't protect.

And something else the Second Amendment, doesn't state, it also doesn't provide protection for the illegal guns, in the United States, now does it, that the millions of criminals, and offenders, have im their possession now does it?

Because the Second Amendment, as its written, has caused a gross amount of guns to be available in the United States, 400 million plus, and no one knows, how many illegal guns that there are in the U.S.?

I view the Second Amendment, as it's written, and then I'm educated on how some of the pro gun extremist, express their arguments?

Along with some of the various statements, that the NRA, has made?

And how some of the Far Right Pro Gun supporters, express themselves?

And my view, the Second Amendment, belongs to the U.S. Public as a whole.

It doesn't belong verbally, to any one group, or crowd, or any parties of special interest, just as the rest of the Constitution, belongs to the Public as well.

The Bill of Rights, belongs to the Public, as a whole, but when individuals commit gun violence crimes, they are infringing, on the Second Amendment as its written, and on the Bill Of Rights, as they are written as well.

But even, when it comes to the Bill Of Rights, who has the Public, as a whole, sounds off individually in regards to the Bill Of Rights, the NAACP, and the ACLU?

So when the Public, as a whole, takes a step back, from whats being expressed by various groups, in regards to the Bill Of Rights, and the Second Amendment, the Public, gets to be educated on the ebb and flow, that some are putting the country through, on a yearly basis?

The Public, as a whole, deserves better, than how some, go about conceptualizing the Second Amendment, and the Bill Of Rights, as they perceive them through their special interests lenses?

Otherwise, its special interests group politics, and the pro gun extremists politics, verses the Public as a whole?

CYDdharta

TKDB said:

@CYDdharta

I asked you this question;

You can keep asking your pro gun extremists question, because CYDdharta, doesn't have a defense for those Police Officers, kids, teenagers, senior citizens, parents, and students alike for being killed by criminals, and offenders with their illegal guns, because the Second Amendment as its written, failed those citizens, and they are the same words, that you're using to defend your own guns with CYDdharta.

You don't have a defense for them either.

And what does @CYDdharta do, he turns the question around om me, as if that tactic, that comes from the same mind of his, that he's shyly using, to defend his pro gun extremists stance with?

I don't do anything here shyly, and that's precisely the tactic you're trying to use to get out of answering my question.

@CYDdharta

You're educating me plenty, on how you view the rest of the Public, through the very lens of your own mind?

"You've made it quite clear that you don't have any answers as to how to keep Police Officers, kids, teenagers, senior citizens, parents, and students alike for being killed by criminals, and offenders with their illegal guns either."

I do have an answer @CYDdharta, and you balked at it, because apparently, your guns, appear, to be more important to you, than the lives of those citizens, who have been killed, or maimed by thousands of the gun violence crimes, that have been committed against those Police Officers, kids, teenagers, senior citizens, parents, and students alike for being killed by criminals, and offenders with their illegal guns, because the Second Amendment as its written, failed those citizens, and they are the same words, that you're using to defend your own guns with CYDdharta, right?

I didn't balk at anything, your answer was just too vague and incohesive to make sense. You said "The Second Amendment, needs to be amended, with the Death Penalty language, and with an Accountability Measure, meaning that every gun, legal, and illegal should be accounted for." What does that mean? How, exactly, would you reword the 2nd Amendment? Precisely what words would you use? Don't equivocate with some nonsense about "I'd make the 2nd amendment pro-puppy dog, pro-fuzzy slippers, and pro-brass door knockers" idiocy, exactly how would the Amendment read? What would your amended Amendment allow that can't be done under current law? How would it reduce crime?

Wrong or right?

My arguments are based on what the Second Amendment says, and on what it doesn't protect.

So the DNA of your argument, falls, because the Second Amendment, doesn't protect, those mass shooters gun violence crimes, does it?

And it also doesn't provide protection for the illegal guns, in the United States, now does it, that the millions of criminals, and offenders, have im their possession now does it?

Because the Second Amendment, as its written, has caused a gross amount of guns to be available in the United States, 400 million plus, and no one knows, how many illegal guns that there are in the U.S.?

There are no protections for illegal guns, that what makes illegal guns illegal. No one has ever credibly claimed that the 2nd Amendment protected their right to possess arms that they used to commit crimes. The 2nd Amendment hasn't caused anything, it has afforded people the freedom to choose to own the property they wish to own.

I've seen two grown men walking around inside of a Wal-Mart before, on two separate occasions, one of them had their gun holstered, but he didn't look like he had it altogether, and when people noticed his gun, they avoided him.

The other guy, had his gun casually stowed in his front pocket, and kept pulling his pants up, because his belt was loose, and I guess that was the fashion statement, he appeared to be making?

Or his gun, could have been a pellet gun, but who can really say?

Maybe he was making a silent statement, he's packing a gun, so you might want to leave his individual self alone?

Those two individual gun owners, helped to educate my position, being that I'm pro family, and pro Public safety, in the face of the Second Amendment as its currently written, because there is Zero accountability for all of the guns in the United States.

OMG, you saw people who might have been carrying guns. Or they might have been carrying pellet guns. Or they might have been carrying toy guns. You don't know what you saw, but what a horrible and scarring sight!! Break out the vapors!!! How would adding the death penalty to the 2nd Amendment have saved you from such a terrifyingly life-changing experience? What, would you have had those people executed?

TKDB

https://amp-cnn-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2018/02/23/politics/nra-political-money-clout/index.html?amp_js_v=a2&amp_gsa=1&usqp=mq331AQEKAFwAQ==#aoh=15670883408763&referrer=https://www.google.com&amp_tf=From %1$s&ampshare=https://www.cnn.com/2018/02/23/politics/nra-political-money-clout/index.html

"Why the NRA is so powerful on Capitol Hill, by the numbers"

By Aaron Kessler, CNN

Updated 2:12 PM EST, Fri February 23, 2018

TKDB

@CYDdharta

You are a staunch supporter of your pro gun stance, aren't you?

And I'm guessing, that you're using the Second Amendment, as its currently written, as a platform, to support, your stance as well?

Sorry, but I'm not supporting your stance.

Because I'm pro family, and pro Public, in opposition to your opinion.

I'm ex military, and any citizen, should be aware of their surroundings, and what's going on around them?

I know exactly what I saw, I saw two individuals, who looked like, they were nervous, and were of the hope, that no one noticed how nervous they looked.

And your opinion, tells me plenty.

The next time, that I see an individual, carrying a 9mm, 40 cal, 45 cal, 357, 38, an AR-15, or a gun resembling an AK-47, and they're maybe wearing any kind of camo garb, or a flack vest, or a BPV (Bullet Proof Vest) and they look out of place, I'm dialing 911, and I'll wait until the Police show up, and gladly point out the individual to the Police.

"OMG, you saw people who might have been carrying guns. Or they might have been carrying pellet guns. Or they might have been carrying toy guns. You don't know what you saw, but what a horrible and scarring sight!! Break out the vapors!!! How would adding the death penalty to the 2nd Amendment have saved you from such a terrifyingly life-changing experience? What, would you have had those people executed?"

John_C_87

@TKDB ;

The Second Amendment of the United States Constitution reads: "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

"Such language has created considerable debate regarding the Amendment's intended scope."

No there is no debate to the scope of the 2nd amendment, scope is set within united state constitution, Any translation made on that would explain only how the basic principle applies to the people as the American constitutional common defense is legal precedent that is addressed by the Amendment.

The weight we bear in all arms is lethal force, it is a basic principle governing cannot take away, by interpretations outside Constitution limits.

TKDB a united state does not exist if a person takes liberty from the united state created. A person who does not own a gun, who does not share the weight of lethal force gun owners share has chosen by their independence to be unsafe in all aspects of the lethal force behind the use of all gun foreign and domestic. as basic principle.

We do not debate the United State in Constitution we make comparison's against choice to basic principle, there is one basic principle. Example a gun is not a basic principle because it is a machine, The machine as a common use for applying lethal force. Machine is a choice for basic principle, lethal force is also a basic principle for choice in constitutional legislation gun. What is followed is legal precedent set by malpractice of law in civil court, a lawyer can address issues unconstitutionally in malpractice simply by not understanding the crime they become a part of. This is because they are not protected by the Maranda right so as one lawyer making a choice of liberty to pursuit can be involved as a participant in the crime that is set before the court.

If a lawyer makes Maranda declaration to the prevision of equal council before court it is insuring that a protection of second opinion exists in any discoveries of hidden wrong. Meaning a negligence and malpractice would be placed before witness if it was taking place before trial. Instead the council takes a liberty of risk to peruse happiness in independence before hand.

CYDdharta

TKDB said:

@CYDdharta

You are a staunch supporter of your pro gun stance, aren't you?

And I'm guessing, that you're using the Second Amendment, as its currently written, as a platform, to support, your stance as well?

Sorry, but I'm not supporting your stance.

Because I'm pro family, and pro Public, in opposition to your opinion.

I'm ex military, and any citizen, should be aware of their surroundings, and what's going on around them?

I know exactly what I saw, I saw two individuals, who looked like, they were nervous, and were of the hope, that no one noticed how nervous they looked.

And your opinion, tells me plenty.

The next time, that I see an individual, carrying a 9mm, 40 cal, 45 cal, 357, 38, an AR-15, or a gun resembling an AK-47, and they're maybe wearing any kind of camo garb, or a flack vest, or a BPV (Bullet Proof Vest) and they look out of place, I'm dialing 911, and I'll wait until the Police show up, and gladly point out the individual to the Police.

"OMG, you saw people who might have been carrying guns. Or they might have been carrying pellet guns. Or they might have been carrying toy guns. You don't know what you saw, but what a horrible and scarring sight!! Break out the vapors!!! How would adding the death penalty to the 2nd Amendment have saved you from such a terrifyingly life-changing experience? What, would you have had those people executed?"

You do realize that winning Call of Duty on your Playstation doesn't make you ex-military, right? Then again, you don't know what a veteran is, so maybe not.

TKDB

@CYDdharta

You're letting the Second Amendment as its written, be the very "talking head," for your pro gun Opinion, aren't you?

Here are some examples:

"You don't have a defense for them either."

"I don't do anything here shyly, and that's precisely the tactic you're trying to use to get out of answering my question."

"I didn't balk at anything, your answer was just too vague and incohesive to make sense. You said "The Second Amendment, needs to be amended, with the Death Penalty language, and with an Accountability Measure, meaning that every gun, legal, and illegal should be accounted for." What does that mean? How, exactly, would you reword the 2nd Amendment? Precisely what words would you use? Don't equivocate with some nonsense about "I'd make the 2nd amendment pro-puppy dog, pro-fuzzy slippers, and pro-brass door knockers" idiocy, exactly how would the Amendment read? What would your amended Amendment allow that can't be done under current law? How would it reduce crime?"

"There are no protections for illegal guns, that what makes illegal guns illegal. No one has ever credibly claimed that the 2nd Amendment protected their right to possess arms that they used to commit crimes. The 2nd Amendment hasn't caused anything, it has afforded people the freedom to choose to own the property they wish to own."

@CYDdharta

Look at how many times, you referenced the Second Amendment?

Like I said before, your Opinion, is telling me plenty.

I don't play video games, being that enjoying life, doesn't include being a gamer, and voluntarily plugging ones mind into a fantasy world, via a first person shooter video game.

And this Opinion from you:

"You do realize that winning Call of Duty on your Playstation doesn't make you ex-military, right? Then again, you don't know what a veteran is, so maybe not.

Brings a question to mind, how many of the various gun violence offenders, or criminals, had previously played violent video games before, prior to them committing their gun violence crimes?

I wonder what the NRA, itself might view, or think about that question?

Because if there is a link to that type of a possibility, I wonder, how fast that a (Study) of that nature, could be put together, and conducted, to see if there could be the existence of such a link?

Are you a veteran?

I know Vaulk is, and he's a pro gun supporter as well.

I'm a veteran, but I support the families, who have been victimized by gun violence, because they had family members, who were killed by gun violence crimes.

And I support Public safety.

Do you support those same families, and the overall Public safety, of the U.S. CYDdharta?

John_C_87

CYDdharta said:

TKDB said:

@CYDdharta

You are a staunch supporter of your pro gun stance, aren't you?

You do realize that winning Call of Duty on your Playstation doesn't make you ex-military, right? Then again, you don't know what a veteran is, so maybe not.

I always thought them to be paid an unpaid. American Military. United State Consitution starts with basic principle and interprits nowhere else.

TKDB

@CYDdharta

What's very peculiar about your opinion, is that you didn't even have a counter opinion for the below:

I know exactly what I saw, I saw two individuals, who looked like, they were nervous, and were of the hope, that no one noticed how nervous they looked.

And your opinion, tells me plenty.

The next time, that I see an individual, carrying a 9mm, 40 cal, 45 cal, 357, 38, an AR-15, or a gun resembling an AK-47, and they're maybe wearing any kind of camo garb, or a flack vest, or a BPV (Bullet Proof Vest) and they look out of place, I'm dialing 911, and I'll wait until the Police show up, and gladly point out the individual to the Police.

TKDB

@CYDdharta

Why do you view the below article as irrelevant?

What's irrelevant about it?

The mention of the NRA?

The mention of the Republican party?

The writer of the article is a former NC Supreme Court Justice, do you maybe view his own words, as irrelevant to your pro gun opinion?

https://amp-newsobserver-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/amp.newsobserver.com/opinion/op-ed/article202571889.html?amp_js_v=a2&amp_gsa=1&usqp=mq331AQEKAFwAQ==#aoh=15671236605688&referrer=https://www.google.com&amp_tf=From %1$s

"My party is beholden to the NRA"

BY BOB ORR THE CHARLOTTE OBSERVER

FEBRUARY 28, 2018 09:25 AM

"There was once a time when the Republican Party – my party – was identified with lower taxes, smaller government, strong national defense and respect for law enforcement. But 18 years into the 21st century, one issue defines the Republican Party, its office holders, candidates and party officials – guns. Yes, the Grand Old Party, nationally, statewide and locally, is a wholly owned subsidiary of the National Rifle Association. Love it or hate it, no matter the rhetoric or the circumstances, the GOP’s defining identity is to wrap itself in the Second Amendment right to bear arms and dance in perfect harmony to the NRA’s tune."

"The recent tragedy in Parkland, Fla., has once again sparked a national debate on the merciless plague of shootings in which innocent children and adults trying to protect them are gunned down by semi-automatic weapon fire. We’ve seen this debate before – over and over and over. But the tragedies keep coming. Despite the prayers and platitudes, the Republican Party and its minions (whether the alt-right news media or Russian bots) continue to embrace the NRA’s unyielding resistance to any kind of meaningful reform of our gun laws."

"Make no mistake about it, the NRA is an enormously powerful political entity, raking in millions of dollars by promoting itself as the defender of gun rights. On the back end, it plows millions in contributions and political organizing into candidates willing to swear allegiance to the NRA political agenda. Candidates (mostly Republicans but with the occasional Democrat) prostrate themselves before the NRA banner, shamelessly seeking the NRA’s endorsement and political and monetary favors. The amounts given to North Carolina’s leading office holders is staggering and plenty troubling."

"Having found a political party willing to be the vehicle for its pro-gun agenda, the NRA has become a political force that Republican candidates and office holders are simply unwilling to renounce. You’d have a better chance of Republicans condemning the FBI, passing trillion-dollar budget deficits and siding with Putin and the Russians long before they’d ever condemn any agenda advocated for by the NRA. Oh, seems that’s already happened."

"Last year at the state GOP Convention, I sat there watching as announcement after announcement was made of auctions and raffles by local parties for some type of weapon – usually a semi-automatic rifle. I don’t think I’ve ever seen hunting rifles, shotguns or black powder rifles auctioned – only semi-automatic weapons or pistols. I half-jokingly asked the party official next to me, “Do we ever auction off beach trips or rounds of golf or Aunt Minnie’s famous pound cake?” “No,” he said, “the NRA gives us these weapons so that’s what we always auction off.”

"I know this will all be construed by NRA stalwarts as anti-gun, and part of some communist conspiracy to take away your firearms. No, the Second Amendment has to be honored regardless of one’s position on guns. But the Republican Party – the party I’ve tried to build and support over the course of my career – seems unable to seriously engage in meaningful action to end the violence we keep seeing across this country from Sandy Hook to Las Vegas to Parkland. Show me one – just one – major Republican figure willing to stand up to the NRA. Show me one willing to say, “I don’t want your support and your money because I do not believe in your political agenda.” That won’t happen. And that’s why the Republican Party is now identified as the Party of Guns. The #MeToo movement, the DACA issue, Trump and Russia, will all ultimately affect the GOP. But I’m afraid that the party will live or die, guns a-blazing, linked eternally at the soul to the NRA and its agenda."

"Bob Orr is a former N.C. Supreme Court justice."

TKDB

@CYDdharta

@ZeusAres42

@Vaulk

@MayCaesar

Does the NRA, treat the Second Amendment, as a puppet for their messaging?

John_C_87

Does the NRA, treat the Second Amendment, as a puppet for their messaging?

The weight that is to bear by all arm’s is lethal force. If a person holds an armament in their possession the weight they hold with that object is lethal force. What ever that object so help them GOD or axiom if to be more perfect in union of meaning. Lethal force is basic principle. The 2nd Amendment is a common defense to the general welfare of all, had people involved in any mass shooting chose to train as they expected other to be trained to carry the burden of lethal force, human lives would have been saved. This is the weight brought to bear in basic principle.

By waiting for some-one else who will carry the wait of lethal force on their behalf, by their demand, means all responsibilities of ownership is left to others, that negligence will always cause more death and harm. This is a (basic principle)

1. Blaming a group for not crusading over a negligence created by self-imposed dependence is also a basic principle between right and wrong.
2. Presuming all groups of people are only capable to act unintelligent when it comes to crime alone is also a basic principle.

Does the NRA, treat the Second Amendment, as a puppet for their messaging? No, A united state holds the 2nd amendment to a self-evident truth, when asked or told by law giving up independence by diplomacy or democracy alone it has a direct effect on the safety of all people in the pursuit of happiness. In basic principle TKDB asking someone to step down form a burden to bear is not equal to asking others to set up to a burden to bear. That one fact makes an overall burden lighter and safer to bear.

TKDB

@John_C_87

Where is the DNA of your words coming from?

The DNA, of your own mindset?

Or from the DNA, of an actual published source, that you can give proper credit to as a Legitimate Reference source?

John_C_87

TKDB said:

@John_C_87

Where is the DNA of your words coming from?

The DNA, of your own mindset?

Or from the DNA, of an actual published source, that you can give proper credit to as a Legitimate Reference source?

Constitution is basic principle and legal precedent; this is a united state with all constitution TKDB. Meaning American United State Constitution bears this weight as well. Does the 2nd Amendment say the right to bear arm or not? The right to carry the wait of armament is the identical basic principle of right to bear arm. The burden of weight that we bear in basic principle of arm is lethal force as a united state.

Can an argument of people be made on the basic idea of independent use of lethal force be used to say a person has a means to commit right by bearing that weight? Yes, I believe they do. Is it the best way to support civil accusations of blame? Clearly not.

Do I believe it is the best Basic principal in American United State Constitution to support all declaration of independence on lethal force? No, I believe the United State held in preamble of American United State Constitution is much better and simpler to understand. It explains clearly that by a person’s pursuit of happiness in not sharing the responsibility of lethal force. It is there own negligence that has put themselves and those they love at much greater risk.

DNA is not the point, basic principle is the argument in a united state. Two well known things a person loses or gains with independence is safety and Happiness. It is written verbatim in the American Declaration of Independence.

verb (used with object), bore or (Archaic) bare; borne or born; bear·ing.

to hold up; support: to bear the weight of the roof.

to hold or remain firm under (a load):

https://www.dictionary.com/browse/bear

Definition of constitution

1a : the basic principles and laws of a nation, state, or social group that determine the powers and duties of the government and guarantee certain rights to the people in it

b : a written instrument embodying the rules of a political or social organization

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/constitution

in basic principle Constitution is basic principle and legal precedent, laws itself is not a united state that can be proven law is a united state with legal precedent as basic explanation. Constitutional.

5 : the act of establishing, making, or setting up ( this is a outright lie. At no point is Constitution just made up. It is well established principle.)

CYDdharta

TKDB said:

@CYDdharta

@ZeusAres42

@Vaulk

@MayCaesar

Does the NRA, treat the Second Amendment, as a puppet for their messaging?

No.

CYDdharta

TKDB said:

@CYDdharta

You're letting the Second Amendment as its written, be the very "talking head," for your pro gun Opinion, aren't you?

Here are some examples:

"You don't have a defense for them either."

"I don't do anything here shyly, and that's precisely the tactic you're trying to use to get out of answering my question."

"I didn't balk at anything, your answer was just too vague and incohesive to make sense. You said "The Second Amendment, needs to be amended, with the Death Penalty language, and with an Accountability Measure, meaning that every gun, legal, and illegal should be accounted for." What does that mean? How, exactly, would you reword the 2nd Amendment? Precisely what words would you use? Don't equivocate with some nonsense about "I'd make the 2nd amendment pro-puppy dog, pro-fuzzy slippers, and pro-brass door knockers" idiocy, exactly how would the Amendment read? What would your amended Amendment allow that can't be done under current law? How would it reduce crime?"

"There are no protections for illegal guns, that what makes illegal guns illegal. No one has ever credibly claimed that the 2nd Amendment protected their right to possess arms that they used to commit crimes. The 2nd Amendment hasn't caused anything, it has afforded people the freedom to choose to own the property they wish to own."

@CYDdharta

Look at how many times, you referenced the Second Amendment?

Like I said before, your Opinion, is telling me plenty.

I don't play video games, being that enjoying life, doesn't include being a gamer, and voluntarily plugging ones mind into a fantasy world, via a first person shooter video game.

And this Opinion from you:

"You do realize that winning Call of Duty on your Playstation doesn't make you ex-military, right? Then again, you don't know what a veteran is, so maybe not.

Brings a question to mind, how many of the various gun violence offenders, or criminals, had previously played violent video games before, prior to them committing their gun violence crimes?

I wonder what the NRA, itself might view, or think about that question?

Because if there is a link to that type of a possibility, I wonder, how fast that a (Study) of that nature, could be put together, and conducted, to see if there could be the existence of such a link?

Are you a veteran?

I know Vaulk is, and he's a pro gun supporter as well.

I'm a veteran, but I support the families, who have been victimized by gun violence, because they had family members, who were killed by gun violence crimes.

And I support Public safety.

Do you support those same families, and the overall Public safety, of the U.S. CYDdharta?

This is nothing but deflection. Just make your case. You said "The Second Amendment, needs to be amended, with the Death Penalty language, and with an Accountability Measure, meaning that every gun, legal, and illegal should be accounted for." What does that mean? How, exactly, would you reword the 2nd Amendment? Precisely what words would you use? Don't equivocate with some nonsense about "I'd make the 2nd amendment pro-puppy dog, pro-fuzzy slippers, and pro-brass door knockers" idiocy, exactly how would the Amendment read? What would your amended Amendment allow that can't be done under current law? How would it reduce crime?

TKDB

@CYDdharta

Does the NRA, treat the Second Amendment, as a puppet for their messaging?

"No."

Yeah, they are, it's FREE publicity for them.

"This is nothing but deflection. Just make your case."

"You said "The Second Amendment, needs to be amended, with the Death Penalty language, and with an Accountability Measure, meaning that every gun, legal, and illegal should be accounted for."

"What does that mean?"

"How, exactly, would you reword the 2nd Amendment?"

"Precisely what words would you use? Don't equivocate with some nonsense about "I'd make the 2nd amendment pro-puppy dog, pro-fuzzy slippers, and pro-brass door knockers" idiocy, exactly how would the Amendment read? What would your amended Amendment allow that can't be done under current law?"

"How would it reduce crime?"

It reduces crimes, but not having innocent citizens. getting slaughtered by the Mass shooters gun violence crimes, or the gun violence crimes in general?

Does that help to pacify your "Equivicate," word?

The below has been expressed already, but I'll cater to your opinion, and reshare it with you, because you deserve a fair and equal explanation, to educate your pro gun extremists opinion with.

@CYDdharta

I'm pro family, and pro safety for the entire Public, and believe that there should be 1000% accountability for all of the 400 million plus guns that are in the country, and as this forum is being written, there is zero accountability for all the guns that exist, in the country.

Like exactly how many illegal guns there are in the United States?

The Second Amendment should be amended with these changes:

The Death Penalty.

And with an accountability measure, meaning that every gun, legal, and illegal should be accounted for.

This way the new Second Amendment, is fair and equal, to the lawful gun owners, and the rest of the public, that doesn't own a gun, with those new amendments.

Being that if an individual doesn't own a gun, they shouldn't have to buy one, just to keep themselves from being victimized by someone else with a legally owned gun, or with an illegally owned gun?

Unless the Second Amendment, truly belongs to the NRA, and not the U.S. public as a whole?

CYDdharta

TKDB said:

@CYDdharta

Does the NRA, treat the Second Amendment, as a puppet for their messaging?
"No."

Yeah, they are, it FREE publicity for them.

"This is nothing but deflection. Just make your case."

"You said "The Second Amendment, needs to be amended, with the Death Penalty language, and with an Accountability Measure, meaning that every gun, legal, and illegal should be accounted for."

"What does that mean?"

"How, exactly, would you reword the 2nd Amendment?"

"Precisely what words would you use? Don't equivocate with some nonsense about "I'd make the 2nd amendment pro-puppy dog, pro-fuzzy slippers, and pro-brass door knockers" idiocy, exactly how would the Amendment read? What would your amended Amendment allow that can't be done under current law?"

"How would it reduce crime?"

It reduces crimes, but not having innocent citizens. getting slaughtered by the Mass shooters gun violence crimes, or the gun violence crimes in general?

Does that help to pacify your "Equivicate," word?

The below has been expressed already, but I'll cater to your opinion, and reshare it with you, because you deserve a fair and equal explanation, to educate your pro gun extremists opinion with.

@CYDdharta

I'm pro family, and pro safety for the entire Public, and believe that there should be 1000% accountability for all of the 400 million plus guns that are in the country, and as this forum is being written, there is zero accountability for all the guns that exist, in the country.

Like exactly how many illegal guns there are in the United States?

The Second Amendment should be amended with these changes:

The Death Penalty.

And with an accountability measure, meaning that every gun, legal, and illegal should be accounted for.

This way the new Second Amendment, is fair and equal, to the lawful gun owners, and the rest of the public, that doesn't own a gun, with those new amendments.

Being that if an individual doesn't own a gun, they shouldn't have to buy one, just to keep themselves from being victimized by someone else with a legally owned gun, or with an illegally owned gun?

Unless the Second Amendment, truly belongs to the NRA, and not the U.S. public as a whole?

...so you want the Bill of Rights to read as follows?

Amendment I

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Amendment II

The Death Penalty.

Amendment III

No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.

Amendment IV

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Amendment V

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

Amendment VI

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.

Amendment VII

In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.

Amendment VIII

Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

Amendment IX

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

Amendment X

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

John_C_87

How I see the differences between myself and TKDB.

The idea in principle is that TKDB is making an intellectual interpretation on the 2nd not constitutional. This is a known schooling instruction given in general for discussion in educational environments. American constitutional Amendment, the elaboration moves away from the basic principle held of lethal force in the 2nd amendment by restriction of word constitution itself.

The title to all article of content to which the list of constitutional amendments are held as united state, Again any law which directs the complex principle of safety is set upon articles in united state under the American United State Declaration of Independence. Safety is set there by principle verbatim.

The state of the union on capital punishment is needed as an American Constitutional Amendment, however to address the question of order directly this type amendment by its priority and seniority as a basic principle would call for other amendments already in position in bill of rights to yielded space on a ratified grievance of this type by its importance.

No American United State constitutional Amendment is guaranteed numerical place when basic principle has a direct influence on human grievance. There are realistically two states of Union which need address in American Constitutional order by Amendment.1. the state of union made by the people on free and liberty. 2nd the understanding of lethal force and independence.

TKDB

@CYDdharta

"...so you want the Bill of Rights to read as follows?"

I want the whole Public of the United States, to be able to vote on how the Second Amendment should be changed, according to their Public Vote.

And the NRA, and the pro gun extremists, and the Far Right Pro Gun supporters, if they wanted to be fair and equal to the Public as a whole, they could, maybe in a sense, consider keeping their "Influential" mitt's, off of the Publics overall education, when it comes to their Second Amendment?

And it being amended, so that it's fair and equal to you, CYDdharta, the NRA, Vaulk, ZeusAres42, MayCaesar, the pro gun extremists, and the Far Right Gun control supporters, Equally, and Fairly, unless you maybe disagree with that type of equality, and fairness @CYDdharta?

Because no amount of campaign influencing, of any type, is worth the loss of any citizens life, in the U.S. because of any gun violence crime, is it?

Meaning Police Officers, and the citizens, of the United States?

CYDdharta

TKDB said:

@CYDdharta

"...so you want the Bill of Rights to read as follows?"

I want the whole Public of the United States, to be able to vote on how the Second Amendment should be changed, according to their Public Vote.

And the NRA, and the pro gun extremists, and the Far Right Pro Gun supporters, if they wanted to be fair and equal to the Public as a whole, they could, maybe in a sense, consider keeping their "Influential" mitt's, off of the Publics overall education, when it comes to their Second Amendment?

And it being amended, so that it's fair and equal to you, CYDdharta, the NRA, Vaulk, ZeusAres42, MayCaesar, the pro gun extremists, and the Far Right Gun control supporters, Equally, and Fairly, unless you maybe disagree with that type of equality, and fairness @CYDdharta?

Because no amount of campaign influencing, of any type, is worth the loss of any citizens life, in the U.S. because of any gun violence crime, is it?

Meaning Police Officers, and the citizens, of the United States?

There is a system for that. All you need to do is build support for your idea, whatever it is.

TKDB

@CYDdharta

The "system," is called the Public as a whole.

(I want the whole Public of the United States, to be able to vote on how the Second Amendment should be changed, according to their Public Vote.

And the NRA, and the pro gun extremists, and the Far Right Pro Gun supporters, if they wanted to be fair and equal to the Public as a whole, they could, maybe in a sense, consider keeping their "Influential" mitt's, off of the Publics overall education, when it comes to their Second Amendment?

And it being amended, so that it's fair and equal to you, CYDdharta, the NRA, Vaulk, ZeusAres42, MayCaesar, the pro gun extremists, and the Far Right Gun control supporters, Equally, and Fairly, unless you maybe disagree with that type of equality, and fairness @CYDdharta?)

@CYDdharta do you disagree with the Public, as a whole, in voting in a Nationwide vote, to amend the Second Amendment, to where it's fair to every American citizen, as a whole Public?

And the Second Amendment isn't yours to play with.

"There is a system for that. All you need to do is build support for your idea, whatever it is."

Your opinion, explains your pro gun extremists ideology clearly.

And the Second Amendment isn't the NRA's plaything either.

TKDB

@CYDdharta

Why not reach out to this website, and see if they view the Second Amendment as its written, as being fair and equal to all of the Police Officers, of the United States?

https://www.odmp.org/

View all 2019 Fallen Officers

"When a police officer is killed, it's not an agency that loses an officer, it's an entire nation.,
Chris Cosgriff, ODMP Founder

CYDdharta

TKDB said:

@CYDdharta

The "system," is called the Public as a whole.

(I want the whole Public of the United States, to be able to vote on how the Second Amendment should be changed, according to their Public Vote.

And the NRA, and the pro gun extremists, and the Far Right Pro Gun supporters, if they wanted to be fair and equal to the Public as a whole, they could, maybe in a sense, consider keeping their "Influential" mitt's, off of the Publics overall education, when it comes to their Second Amendment?

And it being amended, so that it's fair and equal to you, CYDdharta, the NRA, Vaulk, ZeusAres42, MayCaesar, the pro gun extremists, and the Far Right Gun control supporters, Equally, and Fairly, unless you maybe disagree with that type of equality, and fairness @CYDdharta?)

@CYDdharta do you disagree with the Public, as a whole, in voting in a Nationwide vote, to amend the Second Amendment, to where it's fair to every American citizen, as a whole Public?

And the Second Amendment isn't yours to play with.

"There is a system for that. All you need to do is build support for your idea, whatever it is."

Your opinion, explains your pro gun extremists ideology clearly.

And the Second Amendment isn't the NRA's plaything either.

No, it's called Article V

Article V, U.S. Constitution

* * * * * * * * * *

Article V

The Congress, whenever two thirds of both houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose amendments to this Constitution, or, on the application of the legislatures of two thirds of the several states, shall call a convention for proposing amendments, which, in either case, shall be valid to all intents and purposes, as part of this Constitution, when ratified by the legislatures of three fourths of the several states, or by conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other mode of ratification may be proposed by the Congress; provided that no amendment which may be made prior to the year one thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any manner affect the first and fourth clauses in the ninth section of the first article; and that no state, without its consent, shall be deprived of its equal suffrage in the Senate.

https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/constitution/article-v.html

CYDdharta

TKDB said:

@CYDdharta

Why not reach out to this website, and see if they view the Second Amendment as its written, as being fair and equal to all of the Police Officers, of the United States?

https://www.odmp.org/

View all 2019 Fallen Officers
"When a police officer is killed, it's not an agency that loses an officer, it's an entire nation.,
Chris Cosgriff, ODMP Founder

It would be better if you talked to police officers and asked them what they thought.

Take the survey just released last week by the National Association of Chiefs of Police. After polling more than 20,000 sheriffs and chiefs of police, the NACOP found that 86.4 percent “support nationwide recognition of state issued concealed weapon permits” and 76 percent believe that “qualified, law-abiding armed citizens help law enforcement reduce violent criminal activity.”

There is probably no group that supports private gun ownership more than the police do.

Rank-and file-police show even stronger support for private gun ownership. PoliceOne, an organization of about 380,000 active and 70,000 retired officers, surveyed 16,000 members on the subject in 2013.

Virtually all of the survey’s respondents said the “assault-weapons” ban, “a federal ban on ammunition magazines that hold more than ten rounds,” background checks on private transfers of guns, and “a national database tracking all legal gun sales” would either do no good or actually cause harm.

Seventy-one percent of officers said that an assault-weapons ban would have no effect, while 20.5 percent said that it would make things worse. Seventy-six percent of officers said that legally armed citizens are either extremely important or very important in reducing crime. Eighty-six percent of officers said that abolishing gun-free zones would reduce or eliminate casualties from mass shootings.

https://www.nationalreview.com/2016/07/gun-control-police-officers-overwhelmingly-support-second-amendment-rights/

TKDB

@CYDdharta

Why not reach out to this website, and see if they view the Second Amendment as its written, as being fair and equal to all of the Police Officers, of the United States?

https://www.odmp.org/

View all 2019 Fallen Officers
"When a police officer is killed, it's not an agency that loses an officer, it's an entire nation.,
Chris Cosgriff, ODMP Founder

"It would be better if you talked to police officers and asked them what they thought."

You can talk to them, but you won't, because you're a pro gun supporter, and your opinion counts to you more, than those citizens who have been killed by years, of the gun violence crimes in the United States, right?

Is that how you wear your Truth?

Your individual pro gun opinion matters more to you, then those lives, that were taken from their families, because of those gun violence crimes, right?

Your guns mean more to you, than my life means to you right?

You can tell the truth CYDdharta, I'm a veteran, and you've taught me how you view the lives of others through your pro gun supporter lens?

TKDB

@CYDdharta

And do the Public a favor, and stop internet fishing for articles, that you can use to cater to your pro gun opinion?

I don't care about an article written in 2016, when Obama was the President.

Or what the other Liberals said in regards to your shared article.

And Trumps words about mental illness, are, but another sound bite, with the NRA, lurking around with their apparent influences?

And I don't care about what the NRA, says either, but their pro gun messaging, is saying, and educating the Voting Public, with all sorts of educational material, aren't they @CYDdharta?

I'm pro family, and pro Public safety.

ZeusAres42

TKDB said:

@CYDdharta

And do the Public a favor, and stop internet fishing for articles, that you can use to cater to your opinion?

But that's exactly what you do!

CYDdharta

TKDB said:

@CYDdharta

Why not reach out to this website, and see if they view the Second Amendment as its written, as being fair and equal to all of the Police Officers, of the United States?

https://www.odmp.org/

View all 2019 Fallen Officers
"When a police officer is killed, it's not an agency that loses an officer, it's an entire nation.,
Chris Cosgriff, ODMP Founder

"It would be better if you talked to police officers and asked them what they thought."

You can talk to them, but you won't, because you're a pro gun supporter, and your opinion counts to you more, than those citizens who have been killed by years, of the gun violence crimes in the United States, right?

Is that how you wear your Truth?

Your individual pro gun opinion matters more to you, then those lives, that were taken from their families, because of those gun violence crimes, right?

Your guns mean more to you, than my life means to you right?

You can tell the truth CYDdharta, I'm a veteran, and you've taught me how you view the lives of others through your pro gun supporter lens?

You're a veteran, just like the Parkland kids, right?

CYDdharta

TKDB said:

@CYDdharta

And do the Public a favor, and stop internet fishing for articles, that you can use to cater to your pro gun opinion?

I don't care about an article written in 2016, when Obama was the President.

Or what the other Liberals said in regards to your shared article.

And Trumps words about mental illness, are, but another sound bite, with the NRA, lurking around with their apparent influences?

And I don't care about what the NRA, says either, but their pro gun messaging, is saying, and educating the Voting Public, with all sorts of educational material, aren't they @CYDdharta?

I'm pro family, and pro Public safety.

Do you have anything more recent that says anything different? I'm surprised you didn't whine about me quoting the Constitution, that's over 200 years old.

ZeusAres42

When someone keeps constantly repeating the same thing over and over again, my alarm bells start ringing.

TKDB

@ZeusAres42

What's your point?

"When someone keeps constantly repeating the same thing over and over again, my alarm bells start ringing."

Do you mean, like the ways that the NRA, repeats themselves over and over again, in regards to the gun control conversations?

Do your alarm bells go off, when they repeat themselves?

Do your own alarm bells go off, with some of the arguments, that you've made?

TKDB

@CYDdharta

Because your pro gun opinion, pales in the light of those murdered by thousands upon thousands of gun violence crimes, that have killed Police Officers, kids, teenagers, students, parents, senior citizens, and so on.

So while your opinion is important to you, those victims, are important to the Public as a whole @CYDdharta.

I tell you what, get on Twitter:

And push your pro gun extremists rhetoric, and shovel your opinion about the Parkland mass shooter victims, and see what the Twitter Public, thinks about your pro gun extremists commentary?

They saw their fellow classmates get murdered in front of them.

You tell me your Twitter profile name, and we'll see who supports your Parkland kids, pro gun rhetoric?

Let's see you do it?

Go to Twitter, and go make a name for yourself?

By using the Parkland kids, to make your pro gun extremists, argument with?

"It would be better if you talked to police officers and asked them what they thought."

You can talk to them, but you won't, because you're a pro gun supporter, and your opinion counts to you more, than those citizens who have been killed by years, of the gun violence crimes in the United States, right?

Is that how you wear your Truth?

Your individual pro gun opinion matters more to you, then those lives, that were taken from their families, because of those gun violence crimes, right?

Your guns mean more to you, than my life means to you right?

You can tell the truth CYDdharta, I'm a veteran, and you've taught me how you view the lives of others through your pro gun supporter lens?

"

You're a veteran, just like the Parkland kids, right?"

Go ahead @CYDdharta, go make a Social media name for yourself?

@ZeusAres42, Want to give @CYDdharta a hand?

TKDB

In regards to the Parkland Survivors:

https://www.npr.org/2019/02/14/694688365/we-live-with-it-every-day-parkland-community-marks-one-year-since-massacre

"We Live With It Every Day': Parkland Community Marks 1 Year Since Massacre"

Updated at 5:32 p.m. ET

"At 2:21 p.m. on Feb. 14, 2018, the first gunshots began to reverberate through the hallways of Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School, leaving 14 students and three educators dead; 17 others were wounded.

One year later at 10:17 a.m., silence descended on Florida"

ZeusAres42

TKDB said:

@ZeusAres42

What's your point?

"When someone keeps constantly repeating the same thing over and over again, my alarm bells start ringing."

You continue to say your pro-family, pro this, pro that. I mean who are trying to convince; us or yourself?

It is very clear that you are none of those things though as multiple previous posts of yours demonstrate otherwise.

TKDB

@ZeusAres42

"You continue to say your pro-family, pro this, pro that. I mean who are trying to convince; us or yourself?

It is very clear that you are none of those things though as multiple previous posts of yours demonstrate otherwise."

Please explain yourself?

Does this look familiar?
(I expressed this to you, and you left it alone?)

@ZeusAres42

"And so why is that you think you like to make it a habit to twist other people's words around and to make arguments with? Why do you think you have this mindset? Have you considered seeing a quack for this behaviour of yours?"

Are the above words supposed to carry some sort of meaning?

Your words, aren't worth fretting over.

Are you jealous of the attention, that the NRA, is getting on Twitter, or in the mainstream news?

Seems like it?

Why are you scared, to go on the News in the UK, and express your own pro gun rhetoric before a news camera?

Because, you say what you will on the comfort of the internet?

At least the NRA, makes it point, publicly, to express itself, verses how you express yourself?

Why the disparity?

And then you replied to Vaulk afterwards?

Vaulk said:
I went ahead and muted @TKDB, interesting that I can still see that he's posting and referencing my name but whatever he's saying is invisible, I'd recommend this for anyone tired of hearing from him.

"I have muted him, but I am just playing around now. He has proven himself incapable of honest and civil as well as rational discourse. However, just playing his little game for the pure comedy and entertainment value. Will however, get back to the adults in due time."

John_C_87

@TKDB ;

" You're a veteran, just like the Parkland kids, right?"

A survivor of a crime is not a veteran, a supporter of the basic principle of holding the burden of lethal force would be a quality of a veteran at a criminal shooting. The lie is told to hide the basic destruction of family by the promotion of insubordination by choice, the word constitution itself on a general level explains that taking away the family’s independence directly changes their safety.

Preserving United State within constitution is not making a name for one-self. When knowing that a response is required of any kind to lethal force is a threat, the refusal to bear a weight equal on legal force even under the most ideal situation promotes harm by those who refuse the carry the weight of lethal force as negligence. Why would any-one in their right mind insist a united state be created that exposes more families to harm other than to profit?

TDKB you had been told in advance, the victims of the shootings had been told in advance by the clear warming in the 2nd Amendment the safety of not only themselves by those around them will be sacrificed by the removal of the choice to bear arm. What is it about this outcome of death do you not understand clearly? It is only the victims themselves who are traumatized by this event for it is they who did not understand basic principle as an direct outcome of a choice.

I am waiting for an answer is lethal force a burden of weight shared be all arms as a United State?
Can that weight be used as a reason for a person to keep ownership of a any tool of lethal force?

John_C_87

@TKDB ;
Why are you scared, to go on the News in the UK, and express your own pro gun rhetoric before a news camera?

Because all people in a united state had been told before they had been shot, along with those shot and killed that are not sharing with us the weight bearing down on us all of lethal force would effect there safety directly. Its like some-one has independent plan of orginized blame set on the maker of gun, and not the bearer of lethal force for money or something.

John_C_87

Why are you scared, to go on the News in the UK, and express your own pro gun rhetoric before a news camera?

It might be better said this way. It appears that someone, a group of people are using the refusal to listen to a stern warning in writing to make money instead. The 2nds Amendment reads that not holding the weight of lethal force that bears on the people will increase their risk directly. The gun cannot hold this weight for them it is just one arm in a list of many that share this united state by basic principle.

ZeusAres42

@TKDB

You do say some hilarious things. It's just a shame for you that you don't know how hilarious you sound.

Self awareness is completely out the window with you.

CYDdharta

TKDB said:

@CYDdharta

Because your pro gun opinion, pales in the light of those murdered by thousands upon thousands of gun violence crimes, that have killed Police Officers, kids, teenagers, students, parents, senior citizens, and so on.

So while your opinion is important to you, those victims, are important to the Public as a whole @CYDdharta.

I tell you what, get on Twitter:

And push your pro gun extremists rhetoric, and shovel your opinion about the Parkland mass shooter victims, and see what the Twitter Public, thinks about your pro gun extremists commentary?

They saw their fellow classmates get murdered in front of them.

You tell me your Twitter profile name, and we'll see who supports your Parkland kids, pro gun rhetoric?

Let's see you do it?

Go to Twitter, and go make a name for yourself?

By using the Parkland kids, to make your pro gun extremists, argument with?

"It would be better if you talked to police officers and asked them what they thought."

You can talk to them, but you won't, because you're a pro gun supporter, and your opinion counts to you more, than those citizens who have been killed by years, of the gun violence crimes in the United States, right?

Is that how you wear your Truth?

Your individual pro gun opinion matters more to you, then those lives, that were taken from their families, because of those gun violence crimes, right?

Your guns mean more to you, than my life means to you right?

You can tell the truth CYDdharta, I'm a veteran, and you've taught me how you view the lives of others through your pro gun supporter lens?

" You're a veteran, just like the Parkland kids, right?"

Go ahead @CYDdharta, go make a Social media name for yourself?

@ZeusAres42, Want to give @CYDdharta a hand?

You think I should go on Twitter and say that the 2nd Amendment should be kept as it is?? What a wholly worthless waste of time that would be. You're the one that thinks it should be changed. Why don't you go on Twitter and try to create a movement to add "the death penalty" to the 2nd Amendment since you believe that needs to be added somehow to the Amendment?

TKDB

@CYDdharta

I'm saying that you enjoy bantering, and educating the Public, through the lens of your pro gun word play?

Why be stingy, and keep it, exclusively on this specific forum?

Give the NRA, a run for their money?

Hint, the NRA is on Twitter.

"You think I should go on Twitter and say that the 2nd Amendment should be kept as it is??"

"What a wholly worthless waste of time that would be."

"You're the one that thinks it should be changed."

"Why don't you go on Twitter and try to create a movement to add "the death penalty" to the 2nd Amendment since you believe that needs to be added somehow to the Amendment?"

Here's another group of words, of word's, that may or may not speak to your pro gun opinion?

https://www.buckeyefirearms.org/why-gun-control-extremists-cant-wait-next-mass-shooting-0

"THIS is why gun control extremists can't wait for the next mass shooting"

"Have you ever gotten the feeling that gun control extremists are poised and ready to take advantage of a mass shooting event? Almost as if they're waiting for it? As if they've strategized about it?

It's true, of course. And it's been proven through the release of internal documents such as "Preventing Gun Violence Through Effective Messaging." The playbook devotes an entire chapterto exploiting active killer incidents, coldly advocating using "pain and anguish," "death, injury and heartache" to advance their gun control agenda.

And while you might think the reasons for their exhuberance over this kind of death and destruction is related to their ideology, an article written in the immediate aftermath of the Parkland, FL attack suggests there is a far more basic motive: Money.

That's right - buried at the end of a March 23, 2018 Rolling Stone article filled with wishful thinking on how Parkland had finally tipped the scales for gun controllers was this little gem:

And, unfortunately, every shooting creates more momentum. Within 24 hours of Parkland, Everytown had received $750,000 in unsolicited donations. Within that week, Giffords had received an additional $1.2 million from 43,000 donors. In the month since, Moms Demand Action has attracted 1.7 million new supporters, brought in 140,000 new volunteers and witnessed the creation of 150 new local chapters around the country. All of it just more machinery that will be in place, ready to spring into action, at the next right moment.

Gun ban extremists constantly assert that pro-gun legislators are really just paid puppets of gun manufacturers and the NRA. But of course, thanks to Rolling Stone, we know that it's billionaire Michael Bloomberg's "Everytown" that immediately cashed in on the "right moment" (aka the Parkland massacre), to the tune of three-quarters of a million dollars.

Rush Limbaugh has often advised his listeners that if you want to know what the Left are doing, look at what they are accusing other people of. Rush is right."

This article in certain instances isn't right, the Liberals aren't right, and the pro gun extremists aren't right either.

Because apparently the NRA, along with some of the Far Right Pro Gun supporters, and you ACT like the Second Amendment is your plaything?

Let me ask you something, do you love your guns, with the same love, that you love your family with?

The Right, and justifiable voice in this country, when it comes to the Second Amendment, is the Voting Public, as a whole.

And the Public as a whole deserves the RIGHT to change the Second Amendment, as it's written, is they say so.

But I think, that you, and the NRA, along with some of the Far Right Pro Gun supporters, are used to having YOUR opinions, being supported by your individual Opinions, and using the Second Amendment as your puppet, to push your pro gun opinions unto the rest of the Public.

I hate to tell you this, by your apparent, self created entitlement over your guns, via how you're using the Second Amendment, as your puppet, has helped you to apparently lead you to believe, a false sense of entitlement?

The NRA, is suffering from that same, false sense of entitlement as well, by using the Second Amendment, as their puppet, as well?

Just a some of the criminals, and offenders, with their illegal guns, feel like they are falsely entitled to their illegally owned guns as well?

Along with those first time offending mass shooters, who falsely felt entitled to their guns, and then we all know what those first time offenders, did with their guns, now don't we?

IE Nicholas Cruz, and Stephen Paddock.

frame

Howdy, Stranger!

Communities

Netflix to stop reporting quarterly subscriber numbers in 2025

In this Debate

Does the Second Amendment, belong to the Citizens of the United States?

Debra AI Prediction

Arguments

"Second Amendment

"Why the NRA is so powerful on Capitol Hill, by the numbers"

"My party is beholden to the NRA"

Amendment I

Article V, U.S. Constitution

But that's exactly what you do!

When someone keeps constantly repeating the same thing over and over again, my alarm bells start ringing.

"When someone keeps constantly repeating the same thing over and over again, my alarm bells start ringing."

"We Live With It Every Day': Parkland Community Marks 1 Year Since Massacre"

"When someone keeps constantly repeating the same thing over and over again, my alarm bells start ringing."

"THIS is why gun control extremists can't wait for the next mass shooting"

Back To Top

foot

DebateIsland.com

Contact us

Get In Touch