Defend your right to own a car.

[Sinfix_15]

To me, it's completely obvious there are times where a gun is a useful tool but that isn't the end of the debate on gun control. That's only where it starts. We already put restrictions on all sorts of tools including guns. The question is what are reasonable restrictions and what aren't? Although some people think its a very simply answer, I personally think it is quite difficult to answer.

The US is the last free republic on the planet..... the people who do not like complete freedom and the dangers that come with it are free to move to the communist country of their choosing.

[bu villain]

The US is the last free republic on the planet..... the people who do not like complete freedom and the dangers that come with it are free to move to the communist country of their choosing.

There is no such thing as complete freedom. That sort of idealistic rhetoric just obscures the realities of living in a society where compromises between conflicting rights must be made. Everyone in this country is free to speak up about what laws they think should govern the land and they are free to engage in the political process in order to influence what laws are made. If the founders didn't intend for the people to continually question and evolve the laws over time, they wouldn't have created the process by which to do so.

[Sinfix_15]

There is no such thing as complete freedom. That sort of idealistic rhetoric just obscures the realities of living in a society where compromises between conflicting rights must be made. Everyone in this country is free to speak up about what laws they think should govern the land and they are free to engage in the political process in order to influence what laws are made. If the founders didn't intend for the people to continually question and evolve the laws over time, they wouldn't have created the process by which to do so.

The meaning of the constitution is lost in translation. Democrats dissect it only looking for ways to get around it.

It doesnt say "the right to bear arms wont be infringed until politicians decide it should be infringed".....

In regards to the 2nd amendment, many of the founders stated that defense FROM government was one of the main reasons. It seems illogical to think the government can strip you of a right intended to prevent your government from stripping you of rights.

[Sinfix_15]

To me, one of the primary differences in the left and the right....

The left focuses on what the founders DIDNT say in the constitution
The right focuses on what they DID say.


Founders - "right to bear arms shall not be infringed"
Left - "They didnt say ar15"

[Elbow]

To me, one of the primary differences in the left and the right....

The left focuses on what the founders DIDNT say in the constitution
The right focuses on what they DID say.


Founders - "right to bear arms shall not be infringed"
Left - "They didnt say ar15"

No but some things need to be modified to meet modern times.

[Sinfix_15]

No but some things need to be modified to meet modern times.

"shall not be infringed"