In response to:

Liberals Panic As They Lose the Gun Narrative

mnelson125 Wrote: Dec 27, 2012 1:06 PM
Polluters are not protected under the Constitution. Gun owners should not/will not be required to pay extra to enjoy their God-given rights. Should you have to pay extra to enjoy any of your Constitutionally guaranteed rights? What part of "...shall not be infringed" do you not get? Don't want a gun? Don't buy one. The Constitution protects gun ownership, it doesn't mandate it. It's all about liberty & choice.
Frank391 Wrote: Dec 28, 2012 7:38 AM
Product of public education I read. We The People are the militia of the 2nd amendment. That's all. We pay the price all the time for our gunownership. Being vigilant everywhere we go rather than live in this pink eyed utopia that can never exist.
jlayer Wrote: Dec 28, 2012 1:19 AM
You mis-interpret the use of the phrase "well-regulated" contemporaneous with the penning of the Constittution. Read the Federalist Papers.
Bondman60 Wrote: Dec 27, 2012 2:15 PM
mmeinicoff: Your misreading of the phrasing of the Second Amendment has been dealt with. Google it, and you will see that the SCOTUS does not agree that the 2nd Amendment refers only to state militias, but to individuals. As Schlichter pointed out, when the left loses an argument based on facts, they quickly shift to lies and invective. I'd say your post is a full fail, mmeinicoff.
Allan60 Wrote: Dec 27, 2012 1:51 PM
Allowing the government to legislate some undefined price of "societal gun ownership" would be an infringement on the rights of poorer people, and would basically open the door for the government to set the tax so high that ordinary people couldn't pay it.

Unfortunately the gun control crowd is going to have to face their history of deceit here, we've all seen their track record of "reasonable" legislation slide down hill into more legislation. Permit laws lead to zones where the government simply refuses to issue permits and so on. That's part of the problem with the national "conversation" is that gun owners have no trust left in the liberal agenda.
mmelnicoff Wrote: Dec 27, 2012 1:39 PM
It's not an unrestricted God-given right. Gun owners are part of the "well regulated militia", the basis for which the amendment was written. If that wasn't the point, there would be no reason for the "Well regulated militia" clause. You absolutely have to accept that as part of the amendment. On that basis, the regulations may certainly contain clauses about paying for the societal cost of gun ownership, and it is high time they did.
When you argue for a living, you can tell how an argument is going for you. The evidence and my gut both tell me that the liberals have lost control of the gun control narrative.

Not for lack of trying – it was almost as if they were poised to leap into action across the political, media and cultural spectrum the second the next semi-human creep shot up another “gun free zone.” This was their big opening to shift the debate and now it’s closing. They’ve lost, and they are going nuts.

The evidence is all around that...