MSNBC's Alex Wagner: Get Rid Of Second Amendment

[Guest Darthlaidher]

Not only is this woman clueless but so is Bill Engvall. Really Bill no one should be allowed to own an AK-47. The second Amendment isn't about hunting buddy...

MSNBC's Alex Wagner: Get Rid Of Second Amendment | RealClearPolitics

[Raoul]

Sheep.

[Guest bkelm18]

Let's get rid of the 1st. Words are more dangerous than weapons.

[Guest WyattEarp]

Let's get rid of the 1st. Words are more dangerous than weapons.

I say we just get rid of the people who want to get rid of the first and second amendment rights. Revoke citizenship and deport them to Communist China. They will fit in perfectly.

[Guest Darthlaidher]

You know what I found odd about this though.That a Representative of California actually stood up for the 2nd Amendment usually they try to do everything in they're power to stop it so I applaud him for standing up for it.

[Garufa]

Let's just throw out the entire old-ass constitution altogether. It doesn't fit today's ignorant, iPod lifestyle anyway.

[Guest Darthlaidher]

Let's just throw out the entire old-ass constitution altogether. It doesn't fit today's ignorant, iPod lifestyle anyway.

I hope that was sarcasm lol.

Bill says he doesn't think everyone should own an AK-47 because hes a hunter, later on he says he wants the right to protect his family. Bill doesn't understand that the second amendment isn't about self defense or hunting but ok i'll go there with Bill he's a hunter what do most hunters hunt with? Bolt action rifles, since he doesn't want people to own AK-47's and im assuming other fire arms he thinks are evil too.Are you suppose to protect yourself with a bolt action rifle? What happens if you miss Bill? You're screwed what good would you do then..

[Guest WyattEarp]

was she talking about talking about banning a fully automatic AK-47 or a semi-automatic AK-47 or both?

I've heard similar arguments where people want to ban "Assault rifles" of both semi-automatic or fully automatic nature.

what I want to know is, why do they want to ban the semi-automatic ones. those are mostly cosmetic (they look cool), so what does the cosmetic design of a rifle have to do with anything? If you dont go through the process, you can't have a fully automatic one, and those who do go through the process, pay a steep price to do so, and have to jump through a bunch of hoops to get it. It's highly unlikely that a law abiding citizen is going to go through all of that, only to turn around, jump off the deep end and go postal with it.

the rest of the average gun owning population only gets a semi-automatic rifle, meaning, one trigger squeeze, one round. and what does the number of rounds in a magazine have to do with anything either? I've heard that argument as well when these crazies try to pass new laws that a certain type of rifle or handgun can't have a magazine that holds more than x amount of rounds.

and to Bill Maher, I'd sure like to know when the USMC got the F-22, because that's news to me. Only the Air Force has the F-22.

[Mike.357]

If they want to get rid of 2A there is a process to repeal ammendments, isn't there?

And 2A has nothing to do with hunting.

[Guest Darthlaidher]

If they want to get rid of 2A there is a process to repeal ammendments, isn't there?

And 2A has nothing to do with hunting.

Why would you even suggest them going through a process.

[Guest NashvegasMatt]

Why would you even suggest them going through a process.

Easy... dont impose on his 1a by giving him a hard time about the 2a, he is a 14a, therefore discussing the 2a with his 1a is allowed...Then again... if we used our 26a appropriately we could then use our 10a to ensure that the 17a and the 23a are represented by the people, and not by big business and corporations...court adjourned.

[Timestepper]

Sheep.

And idiots... Shidiots!

[Mike.357]

Why would you even suggest them going through a process.

Do you really think people do not know it is possible to remove 2A by actually using the constitution?

There is a reason no one has ever taken this on, because they know they would lose, therefore reaffirming our right. It fits anti's agenda better to try to whittle away at the right to keep and bear arms. Trying to remove it all together is a non starter.

The process to remove ammendments is long and arduous, as it should be.

[Dolomite_supafly]

It would be people like this who would become the first victims if/when the economy collapsed. They think they will be able to protect themselves with demanding words and a call to 911. Most people, especially those on the left side, are disillusioned and have no clue about how brutal life can actually be. To them a brutal life will be when they are without their Ipods, cell phones or double mocha machiatos. If cell phones across the nation quit working for 24 hours people would panic like we have never seen before.

It is when the goverment is unable to protect the sheep any longer that we are going to fall into brutal times. That is when the wolves are going to prey on the sheep. When this happens I will no longer act as the sheep dog and protect the sheep especially when it was their choice that made them sheep.

Dolomite

[DaveTN]

Many people overlook the fact that the 2^nd amendment keeps the federal government from disarming Law Enforcement and State military units.

[bubbiesdad]

If they want to get rid of 2A there is a process to repeal ammendments, isn't there?

And 2A has nothing to do with hunting.

The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.

Thomas Jefferson

Tyranny is defined as that which is legal for the government but illegal for the citizenry. – Thomas Jefferson

Edited November 12, 2011 by bubbiesdad

[greenego]

I watch msnbc just enough to realize "we are not alone". For full disclosure I own an AK47, not to hunt with, not to kill someone, but because I have a right to own one. I truly believe one day some leftist will try to prevent me from owning firearms.

[DaveTN]

I watch msnbc just enough to realize "we are not alone". For full disclosure I own an AK47, not to hunt with, not to kill someone, but because I have a right to own one. I truly believe one day some leftist will try to prevent me from owning firearms.

And I believe that is why the SCOTUS didn’t follow the ruling of almost every Federal District Court in that the 2^nd amendment isn’t an individual right. Had they done that it would open the door for states to outlaw gun ownership. On the other hand ruling that you can carry a gun would have violated States Rights and the states would have never stood for it. Therefore, they ruled that you have a right to own guns, but they allow the states to decide how, when and where they will be carried.

I believe I have a right to carry a gun. I do not tie that right to the 2^nd amendment. Obviously the courts do not agree with me.

[Guest Lester Weevils]

what I want to know is, why do they want to ban the semi-automatic ones. those are mostly cosmetic (they look cool), so what does the cosmetic design of a rifle have to do with anything? If you dont go through the process, you can't have a fully automatic one, and those who do go through the process, pay a steep price to do so, and have to jump through a bunch of hoops to get it. It's highly unlikely that a law abiding citizen is going to go through all of that, only to turn around, jump off the deep end and go postal with it.

the rest of the average gun owning population only gets a semi-automatic rifle, meaning, one trigger squeeze, one round. and what does the number of rounds in a magazine have to do with anything either? I've heard that argument as well when these crazies try to pass new laws that a certain type of rifle or handgun can't have a magazine that holds more than x amount of rounds.

It is surprising the variety of opinions one sees even among "non sheeple".

On another forum had a long discussion about "high power" "high capacity" "military style" weapons with a fellow who seems generally sensible and conservative. We tend to agree on most issues. He is career military, flew combat choppers than trained chopper pilots and now is in the private sector selling choppers to the gov. Very patriotic etc. He does a lot of wilderness backpacking and such (and never carries a gun backpacking).

He doesn't seem generally elitist, but seems elitist about gun ownership. He doesn't mind civilians having pistols or rifles with low-capacity mags, but apparently doesn't think the average citizen is smart enough to have high-power weapons or that the average joe has any need for high-power weapons. Anything past a 1911 or hunting rifle or low-capacity shotgun should be reserved for professional experts such as himself. After long extended back-and-forth discussion, no way he could be convinced that it is appropriate that an average joe should have a pistol mag more than about 10 rd capacity or the the average joe "needs" such. He supports the 2A as long as it is limited capacity non-military type weapons.

So there are people "on our side" that think 33 rd mags for civilians are crazy and irresponsible.

[Caster]

If they want to get rid of 2A there is a process to repeal ammendments, isn't there?

And 2A has nothing to do with hunting.

Why would you even suggest them going through a process.

If they try, it will kick start the inevitable. It will be the match to the tinder that, IMO, needs to be lit.

For all their lunacy, the left isn't as stupid as we like to think. They know that a move like that will sign their death warrant..... literally. That move will begin the second american civil war and in the process of fighting, far right wingers will actively seek out left targets and crucify them. The lines of engaging an enemy will be crossed and they will be outright executed on sight.

You don't beat the biggest kid on the playground by trading shots with him. You manipulate the rules and keep him suspended until finally he is permanently expelled.

[Guest bkelm18]

If they try, it will kick start the inevitable. It will be the match to the tinder that, IMO, needs to be lit.

For all their lunacy, the left isn't as stupid as we like to think. They know that a move like that will sign their death warrant..... literally. That move will begin the second american civil war and in the process of fighting, far right wingers will actively seek out left targets and crucify them. The lines of engaging an enemy will be crossed and they will be outright executed on sight.

You don't beat the biggest kid on the playground by trading shots with him. You manipulate the rules and keep him suspended until finally he is permanently expelled.

I'll agree with that. Too many people are ok with the slow methodical process of whittling away the 2A. However such a monumental attempt to completely eradicate it would very likely result in something the gov't is not ready to contend with.

[Guest Darthlaidher]

If they try, it will kick start the inevitable. It will be the match to the tinder that, IMO, needs to be lit.

For all their lunacy, the left isn't as stupid as we like to think. They know that a move like that will sign their death warrant..... literally. That move will begin the second american civil war and in the process of fighting, far right wingers will actively seek out left targets and crucify them. The lines of engaging an enemy will be crossed and they will be outright executed on sight.

You don't beat the biggest kid on the playground by trading shots with him. You manipulate the rules and keep him suspended until finally he is permanently expelled.

Trust me maybe not in TN but individual states are trying to 30 years ago in CA there were no crazy gun laws it was pretty much a free state like most other states. Now you can't own a AR-15 with a pistol grip unless its featureless you can't own an AK-47 with a pistol grip unless you have a mag lock on it,there's a whole list of banned handguns. Gun Rights groups in CA call that a win for them though. CA recently banned open carry because as the author of that bill said "we want to take our children out to the movies without fear of seeing someone with a gun". After the bill was passed they lauded that now we can take our children to the park and feel safer. I did what I could to fight it I wrote and called every state rep I could about the bill pointing out that not a single shooting or murder occurred while someone was open carrying legally.

Gun Rights groups in CA now hope that they can file a lawsuit to get shall issue in the state. Its a shame you have to lose one battle just to hope to win another. The tinder has been lit in states and it doesn't look good. So I don't wish for the day when people start shouting for the 2a to go because you may be in the position of CA lose some freedom just in hopes of gaining one back even though you might not.

[mikegideon]

Not only is this woman clueless but so is Bill Engvall. Really Bill no one should be allowed to own an AK-47. The second Amendment isn't about hunting buddy...

MSNBC's Alex Wagner: Get Rid Of Second Amendment | RealClearPolitics

The girl is a liberal idiot. Bill also used the visual prop of a full auto rifle. I'm not pissed at him.

Mahr really showed his ignorance. Sure, the military has cool toys, and a bunch of folks that are true patriots. Doubtful you could order most of them to fire on US citizens. Even if you could, Iraq and Afghanistan is a minor skirmish compared to armed US citizens.

[mikegideon]

You know what I found odd about this though.That a Representative of California actually stood up for the 2nd Amendment usually they try to do everything in they're power to stop it so I applaud him for standing up for it.

Issa isn't a bad guy. He's also a Republican. There are some gun loving folks in Kalifornia. They're just outnumbered by granola crunchers.

[Guest Darthlaidher]

Issa isn't a bad guy. He's also a Republican. There are some gun loving folks in Kalifornia. They're just outnumbered by granola crunchers.

Oh yeah there is. California has a ton of country head towards the northern CA area and theres lots of it and head towards the mountains too.The majority of CA is country with like folks like us however the state is ran by SF and LA.