National Rifle Association.

[This_person]

Originally Posted by JPC sr

Those last two questions seem to be saying that the Second Amemdment guarentees the right to hunt and I am leaning to disagree.

The Second Amendment is the right to use firearms against people and not to hunt animals.

If the federal lands stop hunting then the NRA can not claim some Second Amendment right to hunt on "other" federal lands.

Like we are NOT going to let them hunt in Yellowstone or other National Parks.

I think you're confusing the right to bear arms and a wildlife refuge.

What you use them for is not really in question - there are specific laws that say you can't use them to rob, murder, etc. There are lands to be hunted on, and not hunted on. The 2nd Amendment isn't about hunting, it's about having arms.

[JPC sr]

Originally Posted by residentofcre

Ok... I totally don't get where you are coming from on this one...

The right to bare arms was included in the Constitution so that people like King George could not overtake them again. It has nothing to do with Bambi....

I believe that is what I said.

The Second Amendment gives people the right and the power to fight against abusive gov, and nothing about hunting.

Originally Posted by residentofcre

Let's talk about what you would do to fight the crime in the streets of our cities?

The cities are run by the Mayors and Governors and the most one in the US Congress can do is help those authorities to do their jobs to the best.

I certainly do not like putting people into jails for non violent offences.

[wineo]

Originally Posted by JPC sr

I believe that is what I said.

The Second Amendment gives people the right and the power to fight against abusive gov, and nothing about hunting. The cities are run by the Mayors and Governors and the most one in the US Congress can do is help those authorities to do their jobs to the best.

I certainly do not like putting people into jails for non violent offences.

Please tell us what kind of offences should get jail time

[JPC sr]

Originally Posted by wineo

Please tell us what kind of offences should get jail time

Acts of violence.

Like murder, rape, assult, threats, stealing, acts of violence.

[jetmonkey]

Originally Posted by JPC sr

Acts of violence.

Like murder, rape, assult, threats, stealing, acts of violence.

Which of these did you commit that caused you to lose your guns?

[This_person]

Originally Posted by JPC sr

I believe that is what I said.

The Second Amendment gives people the right and the power to fight against abusive gov, and nothing about hunting.

And, nothing against hunting. Not about hunting at all. It's about the right to bear arms. What they're used for is not stated (with obvious limitations as noted above)

The cities are run by the Mayors and Governors and the most one in the US Congress can do is help those authorities to do their jobs to the best.

I certainly do not like putting people into jails for non violent offences.

Why do you usually argue against turning the discussion to the requirements of the local governments, but now you defer to them.

The local infrastructure is run by the County Commissioners. Why aren't they responsible for the local infrastructure, but are resonsible for fighting all crime?

[JPC sr]

Originally Posted by jetmonkey

Which of these did you commit that caused you to lose your guns?

I am not a convicted felon so I am free to buy and own any legal firearms for my own use.

I freely and willingly got rid of my guns because I finally decided that I do not want to shoot anybody nor anything and so I have no need and no desire to have any weapon of violence.

Of course I understand the need for citizens' Second Amendment and for armed police and for National defense.

I like the example of Abe Lincoln that was himself a non-violent person but he still commanded the bloodiest war in American history.

Maintaining violent institutions and being personally non-violent might look like a contradiction but I say it is not.

[JPC sr]

Originally Posted by This_person

And, nothing against hunting. Not about hunting at all. It's about the right to bear arms. What they're used for is not stated (with obvious limitations as noted above)

I disagree.

The Second Amendment specifically says what it is for link it HERE, for the people to form a militia in order to keep ourselves free from State [abuses].

Originally Posted by This_person

Why do you usually argue against turning the discussion to the requirements of the local governments, but now you defer to them.

Because I must frequently refer back to the sad reality that Hoyer is abusing his Federal authority by mis-using his office to overload our State and local governments.

I am all for helping the State and local authorities in doing their jobs best, but not for Hoyer dumping the greed growth.

Originally Posted by This_person

The local infrastructure is run by the County Commissioners. Why aren't they responsible for the local infrastructure, but are resonsible for fighting all crime?

I said I would help fight crime but it is a horrible burden that Hoyer dumps the greed growth onto our area and then sits back blaming the State and local authorities for the overloaded infrastructures, and the increase in crime.

The job of US Congress person is not to create jobs, or to preserve the military bases, or to dump growth onto their District.

Hoyer is abusing his federal position and Hoyer needs to be voted out.

[This_person]

Originally Posted by JPC sr

I disagree.

The Second Amendment specifically says what it is for link it HERE, for the people to form a militia in order to keep ourselves free from State [abuses].

That's an arguable position. Wrong, in my point of view, but one of the few arguable positions I've seen you take.

Because I must frequently refer back to the sad reality that Hoyer is abusing his Federal authority by mis-using his office to overload our State and local governments.

I am all for helping the State and local authorities in doing their jobs best, but not for Hoyer dumping the greed growth. I said I would help fight crime but it is a horrible burden that Hoyer dumps the greed growth onto our area and then sits back blaming the State and local authorities for the overloaded infrastructures, and the increase in crime.

The job of US Congress person is not to create jobs, or to preserve the military bases, or to dump growth onto their District.

Hoyer is abusing his federal position and Hoyer needs to be voted out.

You've yet to show me the action that he takes that's abuse of power. The rest is just doublespeak, "I say this, and mean that, and say that, and mean this...."

[Giantone]

Originally Posted by JPC sr

Acts of violence.

Like murder, rape, assult, threats, stealing, acts of violence.

Some people consider distruction of property that is not yours and act of violence.