Sorry, Herman, but any chance of my support for you just ended.
The 2nd Amendment is no more negotiable than any of the other Amendments and it pains me that you think otherwise.
That he sees individual states as sovereign is encouraging.
I'm not with you on that, at least not if Cain apologizes, learns, and never again makes a similar mistake. The Second Amendment is absolutely non-negotiable, but I am willing to accept that Cain misspoke and later recognized the correct answer [. . . waiting for Cain to correct his near-fatal error].
I live ten mile from Tombstone, AZ. Back in the day, they had gun control. We have gun control in Arizona now. It is just sensible gun control. Herman is correct. This should be a state issue. The Constitution limits the power of the Federal Government, primarily, and only those provisions that specifically and directly apply to the states should be recognized.
He lost me with being for TARP before he was against it.
Yep,I suppose he also thinks free speech is up to the states.
You are correct. Whereas the 1st amendment say CONGRESS shall make no law, thus giving states some ability to regulate expression ..... the 2nd amendment says right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. This would imply that states have limited or zero ability to regulate gun. The SCOTUS also agrees..