Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : GOPwinger Lies/Distortions/Omissions/Perversions of Truth -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: jttmab who wrote (39228)	3/15/2005 10:48:30 AM
From: Srexley	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 173976

"let them appeal the California ban on assault weapons to the USSC." I'm not positive, but I think that putting restrictions on gun ownership has been deemed constitutional. Your "point" just shows that you are not very analytical. "no individual right to bear arms." I'll have to disagree on this one. I actually exercise this right. You keep ranting in your next paragraph about cases the NRA should take iyo. What they have done is secured the right to carry concealed weapons in about 2/3 of the states, and when they get enough (they will) they will go national with it. They are quite a bit smarter than you (fortunately), and I appreciate the FACT that they fight for my RIGHT to bear arms. "I take it you weren't able to find any case that the NRA backed to the USSC." I didn't even look. I know what they are doing to defeat people like you. And I think they are winning. From almost no states allowing the right to carry to most states in just 10 or 20 years. A remarkable achievment against the pro-criminal folks like you. "but you pretend that the Supreme Court won't hear a case backed by the NRA on the 2nd amendment." I don't "pretend" anything. I will stick up for the NRA and trust that their strategy (to secure the right to carry for all Americans) will be succesfully achieved. Only whacked out liberals who don't like the fact that honest folks can protect themselves in America (sorry Canada) make silly "arguments" like yours. btw, I think the question will be answered definitively in the USSC when the time is right. Need to get a couple more honest people on the court first. Not the mush mouth liberals who think there job is to write law, not interpret it. "and can't do much other than call those that disagree with them ignorant, dishonest, hateful, etc." When my rights are attacked, I sling a few arrows back. To give you perspective, picture if I was arguing that you should not be able to give your opinion. Get it? I doubt it. "the supporters of their cause don't know a whole lot" This leftist tactic of insulting those who don't share your views failed SPECTACULARLY in our last National election. Keep it up! We like that you condescending elitist anti-freedom idiots think we (and the framers of our constitution) are dumb.