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: Augustus Gloop who wrote (95520)	4/19/2007 6:26:34 PM
From: longnshort	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 173976

you do realize you can't have an honest discussion with that Bozo. he's Cho's twin brother

To: Augustus Gloop who wrote (95520)	4/19/2007 6:27:08 PM
From: American Spirit	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 173976

The NRA lobbies hard for no background checks whatsoever, no waiting periods, no checks and balances except maybe a check of criminal records and no limits as to firepower or type of ammo. If they had their way we could all buy machine-guns freely. The hollow-points and Glock 9 Cho had were a direct result of NRA lobbying. So was the fact he could walk in and walk out with a firearm with no waiting or no check into his mental history. I also subkmit that the NRA's motives stink. Profits. They could give a rat's ass about the Constitution, which they lie about anyway. The 2nd Amendment had to do with a very different world and set of circumstances, back when every man needed a gun to survive. And those were muskets not high-powered assault weapons, Glocks or M-14's. The purpose was mainly in order to overthrow the government if a tyranny came about. So they needed state militias. But the National Guard are state militias, so we don't need those 1780's rights anymore. They don't apply to today at all. Also, where in the Constitution does it say one has to be 18 or not be a criminal or not be insane? It doesn't. You can't take the 2nd Amendment as a blanket right. It was never meant to be anything like what the NRA types are claiming, especially as it applies to modern society. That's like saying we should take the Bible literally and banish women who are having periods into the desert. Times change.

To: Augustus Gloop who wrote (95520)	4/19/2007 6:51:22 PM
From: American Spirit	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 173976

The NRA is like those who want to legalize heroin and cocaine. The pro-drug types. Not just pot, which probably never killed anyone, but the hard stuff too. The NRA's argument for this makes as much sense as those who say that if heroin and cocaine were freely available and regulated it would be safer and we'd put criminals outn of business, plus that we have the civil right to use any drug we want. The trouble is, hard drugs like heavy weapons will sometimes get people killed and ruin lives. Both can easily fall into the wrong hands and be used by children or unstable and/or criminal adults. Both are very dangerous. I think this is a very apt comparison. Want to try and debate it? By the way, back in the 1780's opium, was totally legal and morphine was used in all kinds of elixirs. Coca Cola started with cocaine as an ingredient. So the comparison to the 2nd amendment being outdated fits.