I just wonder if the federal government is going to start subsidizing every newspaper when they all go bankrupt.
Damage to public safety by following the plain wording of the 2AMD is a situation that is proven to be the opposite of what is claimed. And the 2AMD is absolute even if Public Safety is “compromised.” Trading liberty for safety and security is a fool’s errand, after all because the result of the trade is, as wiser men than those at the Tribune understood, that neither condition remains after the trade.
Tampa Bay Times = hipster fishwrap.
Freedom of the press doesn’t necessarily mean freedom of the press.
I’m sue this paper would love to hear that.
Tampa Bay Times is a commie rag.
It was a gun control debate that I lost against a Libertarian that set me on my way against Liberalism, but it wasn't easy at first.
The Forefathers should have been clear with what they meant to say instead of stating an ambiguous “shall not be infringed”. /s
Jesus Christ.
When I was a flight attendant and the company was trying to screw us over, bending the contract to fit their needs, their answer when we would protest that they were violating our contract was always,”I know that’s what it says, but that’s not what it means.”
——“gun rights are not absolute.”-——
Well...gun rights are not absolute...
“Shall not be infringed” doesn’t mean guns should be treated like candy...
The criminally insane, the psychologically damaged, the other various bad evil people, don’t need access to guns...by legal means...
It’s called common sense...
Tampa Times can’t seem to understand the difference...
This isn't the wild west....well except for Chicago....
The simpleton that wrote that doesn't understand that without the rights protected (note, that is protected, not granted) by the Bill Of Rights public safety is severely endangered - by our own government.
I'd like to ask him/her - or any lib lurkers out there reading this who think that mental midget makes sense... What other "certain limits" would you place on our rights?
RE: the 1st, maybe only "certain" religions merit protection. Maybe only "certain" speech is protected. Other, non-approved religions and inappropriate (hate?) speech will be quashed. As long as the right people get to decided what is approved and appropriate...
RE: the 4th, maybe we just take the attitude that "certainly" ... if you have nothing to hide and aren't breaking any laws then you "certainly" won't have any problem with a little search/inspection/questioning once in a while. It's for the children, to keep them safe. By definition the innocent will be let go and only criminals need fear this. That whole 4th Amendment is over-rated. Of course, we have so many laws and regulations on the books now it is just about guaranteed that every one of us is in violation of something. But don't worry, as long as the right people get to arbitrarily decided what laws/regulations to enforce or ignore...
What do you think lib-lurkers? How much power do you want the government to have? How much? Great, now turn over control of that power to your worst enemy, you know, someone like Sarah Palin and say Rush Limbaugh. ;-) Still think it is a good idea for the government to have that much power and control? No? Good, you're learning. Try to expand your mind outside that parochial, over-messaged world you live in. Realize that for every person you think is a great leader and you wish they had more power to do the things you agree with, to someone else that person represents their worst fears incarnate. Best if neither of you has live with someone having that much power/control.
” Republican legislators are controlled by the NRA”. WTH? I thought it was the Koch Bros that controlled congress. “
Let me explain...
They all sit at a huge round table in a circular room hidden in a volcano. On the walls are world maps tracking their plans for domination. They all wear masks and every so often, one of them shows an inclination to be less evil so another of them, usually La Pierre, pulls a lever and the wavering guy falls, chair and all, into a shark pit to be an example for the others to be even more ruthless. There used to be 3 Koch brothers but now the remaining 2 are, shall we say, dedicated.
Good thing the caped crusader, mild mannered George Soros, is on their trial with his super car and shoes stuffed with gadgets supplied by Q.
Push a Lie until it becomes Truth.
IS
To a leftist: There are no absolutes................
I used to be for gun control. Then, the Federal government used armored vehicles against American citizens at Waco.
The Democrats will do anything, anything, to get what they want. They do not listen to reason. The only thing they understand is fear. They must be afraid of an armed citizenry or they will reduce our population by any means available to them.
If by being pro-gun, Republicans are controlled by the NRA, what does it mean to be anti-gun, since most gun crimes are committed by -- wait for it -- criminals. Does that mean that disarmists are controlled by the criminals?
Progressives are simply upside-down. I am not sure why they cannot understand the meaning of the Bill of Rights. The Bill of Rights was written to preserve the rights of man from the tyranny of the majority. Phrases like ‘Shall not infringe’, ‘Congress shall make no law’, ‘No soldier shall’, ‘shall not be violated, ‘no warrants shall issue’, and ‘No person shall be held’ are very clear in their meaning. Madison thought that one party control in government would trample essential rights. He was correct about the one party control; the Democrat-Republican Party. He was incorrect about how effective the Bill of Rights would be.
Neither does the Tampa Bay Times mean what it says. It’s actually the Nantucket River Lately.