I believe I have figured it out.......
The 2nd Amendment and the jabs being exchanged on here.
There seems to be two distinct groups on this forum:
1) Those who place the RTKBA at or near the top of the priority list, and.
2) Those who do not
It does not require one to possess a PhD to discern the difference, only the ability to read, and to comprehend the same.
First, there are those who believe the RTKBA, as enumerated in Amendment II to the BOR, is a right free from ANY infringement, intrusion, regulation, or mandates. Period. This includes 4473s, permits to purchase or carry, tax stamps, legitimate sporting criteria, magazine capacities, full-auto, barrel lengths, etc. NO INTRUSIONS. Period.
Second, there are those who are willing to accept 'some' regulation. They are apalled that some folks will not abide by their state's regs by shipping firearms to their state. Some profess to believe in the RTKBA, yet espouse the view that full-auto regulations are ok. Others believe those mentioned in the preceeding paragraph should not be so 'militant' or 'angry' in their defense of the 2nd.
I readily admit that I belong to the first group, and have some questions for those of you in the second:
For those of you that live in the state many refuse to ship to, why the anger? The 'laws', including those involving FFL to FFL transfers, are unconstitutional. Where are the marches on the state capital? They happen when other issues are being considered. Why do they not happen when issues regarding the RTKBA are being considered? What if the state were to confiscate your vehicles with no cause, no payment to you? What if the state were to come into your houses of worship, and mandate what can/can't be said or done during those services? What if the state regulated what you can/can't watch on television? You'd all be up in arms. You'd be flooding the governor's and representative's offices with emails, calls, faxes. You'd scurry to the capital in massive numbers and demand an answer from your elected leaders. But the transfer law only affects RTKBA issues. "We can live with that." "It's not so bad, just a minute or two of paperwork." "Well, I guess we have to live with it." See what I'm getting at. Priorities folks, priorities.
As far as being 'angry' or 'militant' in defense of the RTKBA, is there any other way to be? It has been proven that being nice, courteous, and passive when our rights are trampled only leads to more trampling. You may like it, or perhaps just put up with it when someone schits on you. I don't and I won't.
There was a time in this country where folks would stand up and say, "Hell no. You are not going to do that." What happened? "But, but, if I stand up, they might not like it. I could be arrested."
The Founders knew if they stood up, they would surely make a trip to the gallows if caught.
They stood up anyway.
There seems to be two distinct groups on this forum:
1) Those who place the RTKBA at or near the top of the priority list, and.
2) Those who do not
It does not require one to possess a PhD to discern the difference, only the ability to read, and to comprehend the same.
First, there are those who believe the RTKBA, as enumerated in Amendment II to the BOR, is a right free from ANY infringement, intrusion, regulation, or mandates. Period. This includes 4473s, permits to purchase or carry, tax stamps, legitimate sporting criteria, magazine capacities, full-auto, barrel lengths, etc. NO INTRUSIONS. Period.
Second, there are those who are willing to accept 'some' regulation. They are apalled that some folks will not abide by their state's regs by shipping firearms to their state. Some profess to believe in the RTKBA, yet espouse the view that full-auto regulations are ok. Others believe those mentioned in the preceeding paragraph should not be so 'militant' or 'angry' in their defense of the 2nd.
I readily admit that I belong to the first group, and have some questions for those of you in the second:
For those of you that live in the state many refuse to ship to, why the anger? The 'laws', including those involving FFL to FFL transfers, are unconstitutional. Where are the marches on the state capital? They happen when other issues are being considered. Why do they not happen when issues regarding the RTKBA are being considered? What if the state were to confiscate your vehicles with no cause, no payment to you? What if the state were to come into your houses of worship, and mandate what can/can't be said or done during those services? What if the state regulated what you can/can't watch on television? You'd all be up in arms. You'd be flooding the governor's and representative's offices with emails, calls, faxes. You'd scurry to the capital in massive numbers and demand an answer from your elected leaders. But the transfer law only affects RTKBA issues. "We can live with that." "It's not so bad, just a minute or two of paperwork." "Well, I guess we have to live with it." See what I'm getting at. Priorities folks, priorities.
As far as being 'angry' or 'militant' in defense of the RTKBA, is there any other way to be? It has been proven that being nice, courteous, and passive when our rights are trampled only leads to more trampling. You may like it, or perhaps just put up with it when someone schits on you. I don't and I won't.
There was a time in this country where folks would stand up and say, "Hell no. You are not going to do that." What happened? "But, but, if I stand up, they might not like it. I could be arrested."
The Founders knew if they stood up, they would surely make a trip to the gallows if caught.
They stood up anyway.
0
-
The rights recognized by the Bill of Rights stand in equal importance. 0 -
The rights recognized by the Bill of Rights stand in equal importance.
Agree 100%, and the RTKBA ensures the preservation of them all.0 -
When our new president is successful in passing a new AWB that is permanent, will we see marches and protests in what are now free States resulting in bloodshed and mass arrests? I don't think so.
Those of us here in California are aggressively doing everything in our power to legally nullify or eliminate our ridiculous firearms laws. Public protests and similar actions would not be effective. It would only serve to undermine the work we are currently doing through legal channels with great success.
You may not understand this now. But you will, soon.0 -
quote:Originally posted by impactco
Those of us here in California are aggressively doing everything in our power
Which is what, other than whining on the internet. Please post what you are doing, how and what are the results.0
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
4 comments