In response to:

Why the 2nd Amendment

alphonsejones Wrote: Jan 02, 2013 8:52 AM
I weonder how lewis feels this morning knowing his fellow blacks were involved in 15 shootings yesterday in schitcago that resulted in 3 deaths racist's like Lewis see law abiding whites as a problem but he has no problem with black on black violence or the record number of gun deaths in the city with the most restrictive gun laws as well as a reported 600 violence prone thug gangs and between black and hispanic gangs, anyone living in proximity to these 2 groups should be armed and ready to protect themselves and their families and their property
wtmoore1 Wrote: Jan 02, 2013 8:57 AM
Obviously, the gun violence you reference is the exact concern that Rep. Lewis is trying to alleviate by restricting lawful gun ownership. Otherwise, what's his point?
alphonsejones Wrote: Jan 02, 2013 9:06 AM
so remind me again troll

when any nationally elected black has lectured other blacks about the growing levels of black on black violence that plagues their communities

your marsixt messiah hectored America that we needed to do some soul searching then zimmerman shot and killed the wannabe thug martin

yet your messiah isn't telling windy city blacks that they need to curb their violence otr do any soul searching about why violence defines their community

but then marxist's like you believe lawful citizens have no rights that don't comply with big govt socialism
Jay Wye Wrote: Jan 02, 2013 9:10 AM
to achieve what he wants ,it's necessary to violate the Constitutional prohibition of the Second Amendment. what part of "shall not be infringed" don't you understand?

WHY will you folks not stay -within- the Constitution?
wtmoore1 Wrote: Jan 02, 2013 9:33 AM

AGAIN, your interpretation of the constitution is not the only one. No matter how "clear" it appears to you. Check the Supreme Court cases on the 2nd Amendment. That's why we have a Supreme Court. To settle these sorts of differences.
pascagoulapappy Wrote: Jan 02, 2013 9:35 AM
And you don't lie, right, Dubya Tee?
wtmoore1 Wrote: Jan 02, 2013 9:35 AM

I'm really sorry that African-American leaders aren't "lecturing" enough people to satisfy you. But, to be honest, that matters very little to me. That white conservatives resent the black community for trying to retake some of their rights is laughable. But keep trying...

I'm sure, after a few more years of +90% of African-Americans breaking for the Democrats, the right will come around and stop telling black people they are to blame for the inequities they face.
Seawolf Wrote: Jan 02, 2013 9:36 AM
Are you insane or just stupid? " trying to alleviate gun violence by restricting LAWFUL gun ownership"? It's not law-abiding people who are killing these folks, it's the drug dealing gang bangers. Maybe that moron should address that or is it not PC to point it out?
wtmoore1 Wrote: Jan 02, 2013 10:02 AM

I'm not sure if you are being sarcastic or missing the point...

Liberal support for gun restrictions are designed to stop that "drug dealing gang banger" from acquiring a gun in the first place. It's not that anyone is too "moronic" or culturally sensitive to point out the obvious nature of criminal violence. It's that the political sides argue about the root cause, and also the effective consequences.

That the right thinks everything is so "self-evident" undermines their claims. When a complex situation seems simple, you might just be missing something.
Rep. John Lewis, D-Ga., in the wake of the Newtown, Conn., shootings, said: "The British are not coming. ... We don't need all these guns to kill people." Lewis' vision, shared by many, represents a gross ignorance of why the framers of the Constitution gave us the Second Amendment. How about a few quotes from the period and you decide whether our Founding Fathers harbored a fear of foreign tyrants.

Alexander Hamilton: "The best we can hope for concerning the people at large is that they be properly armed," adding later, "If the representatives of the people betray their constituents, there is...