Larry........... WOW!!!!
You are wound up. You need a cold shower. I read your extensive critique and all I can say is Thank You. I am being 100% honest with you. I do not think you made one good point. I can tell by your responses that you did not even comprehend some of my post. As much as I would like to, I cannot even have an argument with you. I would not know where to start. You do get the award for being the most passionate gun owner in the Paddock though. Not only do you not support gun reform, you can barely even speak of the issue.
You sure love that 2nd ammendment. You are alot smarter than me. Did they specify that everyone has a right to bear or keep arms, but only after you acquire a license and pass a background check? I looked but I couldn't find that in the language anywhere. All other readers may now skip ahead while I explain my point to Larry. We already have regulations Larry! Can't these regulations be changed to contend with new problems that arise as our society changes?
Also, please do not quote me and then insert your own words within the quote. Its polite to respond below the quote in the body of the post. You are the only one I see who does this. I will give you an example below of what not to do.
Translation:
'I have no facts with which to counter a darned thing Larry said
, so I'm going to pettifog like crazy and hope my diversions and verbal smoke & mirrors passes for a stellar rebuttal/counter argument in the eyes of some.'
And, BTW, your complaint about the quotes thing is completely bogus. There's not one person here (except you, evidently...and only because you've
elected to have the problem) who can't tell exactly where your stmts ended and mine began. (Well, maybe color blind folks
could have a problem.)
With regard to this one: "Did they specify that everyone has a right to bear or keep arms, but only after you acquire a license and pass a background check?" The answer is a resounding NOPE, which you undoubtedly know already...or maybe you don't. They said we have the right to keep AND bear...not keep OR bear...and that those rights shall not be infringed - which is exactly what CCW permits, licenses and all the rest DO...infringe. It should be noted that one does NOT have to get government's
permission - nor pay govt a FEE - to exercise a
right either. And again, that's what CCWs require folks to do! Therefore, any law passed that requires such fees and permits in order to exercise one's
rights (like CCWs in fact
do) are a major infringement and are/were null and void upon their signing according to the constitution itself.
So, note to
you: Just because there's a law on the books
does not mean it's constitutional or
legally enforceable. It just means we the people have been lax in dealing with it - and/or our officials have. Let me give you a
current example: Fed law says pot's illegal - period. Wash & Colo pass
state laws saying it isn't. 'Constitution says federal law
trumps state law. But, Obama says, 'Heeeey, the people have spoken, so no big deal'. 'Doesn't matter what HE says - pot's
still illegal until the
fed law is changed. Another e.g.: It's unconstitutional to
exempt a specific group of people from a federal law. Via exec order, Obama exempts 800K illegal aliens from possible deportation proceedings. 'Heeeeeeeeeeeeey, >I< have spoken...so no big deal.' 'Doesn't matter what he says - doing that is
still illegal until the fed law is changed.
"You sure love that 2nd ammendment."
...as everyone in this country should, because if IT falls, so does everything else. In fact, I believe one of The Founders said the same darned thing a couple centuries ago. And yet you make sound like strongly defending it is somehow a position that's 'too extreme, too extreme, too extreme' as you liberals are always so quick to claim. The Founders would
not agree with you. Read the fed papers.
