Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: School of Rational Thought

"Anyone who frames his comments with "hunting" has a long way to go to become convincing."

I don't hunt or own a gun. Can you explain what you mean?


20 posted on 01/14/2007 2:15:33 PM PST by JRochelle (Hunter 2008!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies ]


To: JRochelle

The second amendment has nothing to do with hunting.


22 posted on 01/14/2007 2:17:03 PM PST by oursacredhonor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies ]

To: JRochelle

I'll jump in. The 2nd Amendment has absolutely NOTHING to do with hunting or "sporting purposes." The founding fathers intention was for citizens to have the weapons necessary to fight against an oppressive government should such a government ever come to power.

And by the way, the term "well-regulated" is misunderstood.
Modern day liberals assume it means government interference, which they love, but in the 18th century
it meant "well trained."



32 posted on 01/14/2007 2:56:06 PM PST by july4thfreedomfoundation (Honor and respect the members of our military; without them, America would cease to exist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies ]

To: JRochelle
Politicians who want to ban most guns try to sound moderate by saying that they support the right of hunters to enjoy their sport, etc. Then when they are elected they come out with a long list of guns that they declare hunters "don't need" to have in order to hunt. Such politicians will say that no "hunter needs a handgun, no hunter needs an 'assault rifle' and no hunter needs a 'sniper rifle'" and so on.

Probably such a politician would allow (note the word "allow") you to keep an expensive shotgun if you owned a large estate and he would allow you to hire armed security guards for your gated community, but that is about it. It is a clever but tired attempt to divide gunowners (the "bad" people who own handguns or rifles vs. the mythical "hunter" who is so good because "needs" fewer and fewer types of firearms). Most gunowners are on to this trick -- whether they hunt or not.

38 posted on 01/14/2007 3:37:41 PM PST by Wilhelm Tell (True or False? This is not a tag line.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies ]

To: JRochelle; School of Rational Thought

The poster likely meant that "hunting" is not the reason for the Second Amendment and that pandering to hunters won't do diddley for the pandering candidate, Romney, Giuliani or McLame, whoever...


46 posted on 01/14/2007 5:02:51 PM PST by dcwusmc (We need to make government so small that it can be drowned in a bathtub.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies ]

To: JRochelle
"Anyone who frames his comments with "hunting" has a long way to go to become convincing."

Many liberals and those who never learned to diagram sentences, and never read the Constitution and Bill of Rights think that the 2nd Amendment has something to do with hunting or the military.
This also explains why Johnny can't read and the liberals like it that way.
47 posted on 01/14/2007 5:24:48 PM PST by WildBill2275 (The Second Amendment guarantees all of your other rights)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson