Posted on Jun 15, 2016
Why It's Time to Repeal the Second Amendment
2.9K
50
38
6
6
0
Are they serious? The mantra of this leftist regime is never let a crisis go to waste. This is the model for the Hegelian Dialectic. 1. Thesis, create the crisis. 2. Antithesis, public reaction to the stimuli. 3. Synthesis, the end planned result is created and instituted.
also can can be described as problem, reaction, and solution.
also can can be described as problem, reaction, and solution.
Why It's Time to Repeal the Second Amendment
Posted from rollingstone.com
Politics
Democrats
2nd Amendment
Gun Control
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 14
10
10
0
The anti gun people should show leadership and turn in all firearms and post a sign on their property, gun free zone. Oh yeah, fire all their personal security.
(10)
(0)
LTC David Brown
One of the things I find fascinating with the left is the hypocrisy. I start with an anti gun columnist . He regularly wrote Antiguan columns and blasted the lunacy of gun owners. Mr William's hypocrisy was exposed when he accidentally shot a youth in the foot with a gun he illegally possessed. Then we have the guy in Buffalo New York who worked to make schools gun free zones.and a criminal offense to have a gun in a school zone...well well well gues who got caught with a gun in a school zone? Then we had Rosie O'Donnell who didn't think people need guns to protect them selves but wanted armed guards for her and her family.
(1)
(0)
6
6
0
I find the professors argument to repeal the 2nd Amendment completely laughable! According to him the amendment needs to be repealed because it is outdated? Weapons and incidents like Orlando had yet to be endured by the American people? Tell me professor! Should we repeal the 1st Amendment, regarding the freedom of religion, because a certain sect likes to fly planes into buildings and murder those of whom they do not agree with? Your argument holds no water sir!
(6)
(0)
CPL Robert Ray
SGT Gregory Lawritson - If he has so many problems with the Constitution, let him move to some deserted island somewhere and write his own!
(0)
(0)
3
3
0
Portions of the country will continue to demand that the rights of others be stripped away because it doesn't affect them until another portion demands that the a portion of the firsts right are taken away because it doesn't affect them until we have all asked for our rights to be chipped away little by little and have established a peeve can't to do so because at the time it didn't affect us. It'll be too late before we realize it en masse
(3)
(0)
PO2 (Join to see)
SSG John Thornton - so then should the police be disarmed? I can link you many articles of police shooting and killing innocent people. I'm trying to agree to disagree with you but I don't rly understand your end game. If you were making the decisions what would be the legislation that you would enact?
(0)
(0)
PO2 (Join to see)
SSG John Thornton - so 3 plus witnesses. The FBI check I did for clearance required that. None of my references were contacted. There are many examples of a serial killer, shooter, violent person in whatever circumstance having friends and family claiming that they were just the average joe. Honestly I'd think that anyone who wanted to could find 3 people to vouch for them.
Honestly I was more expecting anyone who has been investigated for ties to terrorism. I could see that within certain parameters. We wouldn't want to strip the rights of someone who has been proven innocent just because at one point they were at cause for suspicion. There is rly no good answer, if not a gun a fertilizer bomb is easily obtained and made from directions everywhere. You can't protect people from the everyday. This guy having his gun could just as easily have been stopped by one armed security guard. Regardless of a weapon he chose to use instead of a gun one armed person could have stopped him. Would they or wouldn't they is all speculation but if you're going to argue that him not having access to a gun could have stopped the tragedy I'm going to argue that someone else having one could have as well.
Honestly I was more expecting anyone who has been investigated for ties to terrorism. I could see that within certain parameters. We wouldn't want to strip the rights of someone who has been proven innocent just because at one point they were at cause for suspicion. There is rly no good answer, if not a gun a fertilizer bomb is easily obtained and made from directions everywhere. You can't protect people from the everyday. This guy having his gun could just as easily have been stopped by one armed security guard. Regardless of a weapon he chose to use instead of a gun one armed person could have stopped him. Would they or wouldn't they is all speculation but if you're going to argue that him not having access to a gun could have stopped the tragedy I'm going to argue that someone else having one could have as well.
(0)
(0)
MCPO Roger Collins
PO2 (Join to see) - You have now been exposed to one of the few far left wing nuts on RP. I commend your patience.
(1)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google