Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Facebook | Twitter | All Access E-Edition | Home RSS
 
 
 
Latest Post:
Started By:
Rank:
Category
42 minutes ago.
by slinky
rocker
#1

Daily breaking news and news the liberal media doesn't want you to know, won't report, or just daily news issues.

Americans for many years have had to rely on left leaning biased news reporting from liberal media such as NBC, ABC, and CBS and the New York Times. As most of these outlets struggle to remain on the air and in print, the new media is flourishing and people are hearing both sides of the issues. This forum will provide people with a place to discuss daily news issues of any kind or discuss articles not printed or aired by the liberal news outlets.

 
 

Member Comments

I suppose one way would be in the wording "bear arms " If you cant bear(carry or heft) a weapon then you have no right to it !Hmmmmm.......

Posted 151 days ago.

So everyone in this country will have a battleship in their frontyard . Nope ! There has to be some common sense instilled somewhere in this !Its the right to keep and bear arms, not loadup with anti-tank missles in your garage !

Posted 151 days ago.

Shopsteward

There is a process to amend it, go that route if you can

Posted 151 days ago.

Shopsteward

The authorities have to make provisions regarding whats legal and necessary and whats not , simple as that !

This is the idiocy of the left, they trust the very Govt that our forfathers wished to protect us from. THE CONSTITUTION is not subject to "the authorities"

Posted 151 days ago.

Coaluser

You are right on all points abby and shop. I think the founding father had a vision. One night after they had all worked tirelessly for monthe to frame up the constitution, they had a "nostadamus-like vision and saw Mr hiLIARy and Mrs Bill Clinton, Obama, Biden, Bloomberg, Feinstein, Sarah Brady and they all rushed in the next day to put the perfect wording in... They had been shown the devils working...

Posted 151 days ago.

When does commom sense come into the equation ? The second amendment gives one the right to keep and bear arms but it says nothing about what those arms are, they could have been talking about spears ! The authorities have to make provisions regarding whats legal and necessary and whats not , simple as that !

Posted 151 days ago.

absolem

to sharply curtail the military power of the federal government, which would have required substantial changes in the original Constitution. Yet the Amendment was easily accepted because of widespread agreement that the federal government should not have the power to infringe the right of the people to keep and bear arms, any more than it should have the power to abridge the freedom of speech or prohibit the free exercise of religion."

nope...sure doesn't sound like the founding fathers had hunting on their minds at the inception of the 2nd amendment. in contrast, the citizenry has fallen short in the "They disagreed only about whether an armed populace could adequately deter federal oppression" ability as mentioned above. i did not receive this months allotment of TOW Missles...have you?

Posted 151 days ago.

absolem

as found on constitutioncenter dot org:

"This massive shift of power from the states to the federal government generated one of the chief objections to the proposed Constitution. Anti-Federalists argued that the proposed Constitution would take from the states their principal means of defense against federal usurpation. The Federalists responded that fears of federal oppression were overblown, in part because the American people were armed and would be almost impossible to subdue through military force.

Implicit in the debate between Federalists and Anti-Federalists were two shared assumptions. First, that the proposed new Constitution gave the federal government almost total legal authority over the army and militia. Second, that the federal government should not have any authority at all to disarm the citizenry. They disagreed only about whether an armed populace could adequately deter federal oppression.

The Second Amendment conceded nothing to the Anti-Federalists’ desire

Posted 151 days ago.

Shopsteward

Another lie of the left. Do u really think the founders cared so much about hunting they enshrined that right in the Constitution?

Posted 151 days ago.

Shopsteward

NASCAR what does deer hunting have to do with the Second Amendment?

Posted 151 days ago.

And just what is their "agenda" ? Maybe keeping some whack-job from killing someone from 1 1/2 miles away ? It isnt good for anything other than killing !Its no different than owning a military assault weapon , no one needs one of those either !

Posted 151 days ago.

Coaluser

and elk and moose.

Posted 151 days ago.

Coaluser

Hunters out west on the plains regularly make 500 yard or more shots on mule deer. These are not easy shots, keep in mind. Takes much practice and skill. The armor piercing ammo is not available to civilians. Another anti gun group spreading stupidity to further their agenda.

Posted 151 days ago.

NasCarNut

These 'anti-materiel' sniping rifles can strike accurately from a distance of more than a mile" (1.6 kilometers), the Violence Policy Center, a non-profit organization that advocates for gun control said.

"They can penetrate light armor, down helicopters, destroy commercial aircraft, and blast through rail cars and bulk storage tanks filled with explosive or toxic chemicals, all with potentially catastrophic effect."

and these semi automatic weapons are for sale to civilians...who needs a gun like this to harvest a deer??...

Posted 151 days ago.

Abby , our problems started when one side didnt get their way and have chosen to make the divide unassailable .Instead of putting the differences aside and uniting to govern fairly . This strategy winds up costing the regular folk the most and puts our economy at risk .

Posted 151 days ago.

NasCarNut

Official state rifle -

Senators in Tennessee -- in a near unanimous vote -- designated a rifle that is said to be capable of destroying commercial aircraft as an official state symbol.

hmmm...

Posted 151 days ago.

absolem

Sure would...so would composition and density.i hope your world goes exceedingly well for you.

Posted 151 days ago.

moderation

When splitting hairs, the degree of difficulty increases with the fineness of the hair, no?

Posted 151 days ago.

absolem

Moderation.....I would hope your suggested intent is wrong. In addition....it appears that the darker the hair, the thicker it tends to be...from what I have read.

Posted 151 days ago.

moderation

absolem-You know exactly what was implied by coal. And,the characteristic fine composition of red hair, is my response to the splitting of hairs comparison used by yourself. Good morning to you.

Posted 151 days ago.
 
 
 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
*Password:
Remember my email address.
or