New NRA Ad Shows Their Low IQ - Will Be Their Downfall

[Bigblue1]

I appreciate you actually have used the Constitution as your basis. So despite our differences we are at least speaking the same language . Can we agree that the Constitution is the highest law of the land and should be followed?

Where we differ on "nessecary and proper" is that the clause refers to laws nessecary and proper toward the implementation of the enumberated powers, found also in Article 1 section 8 paragraphs 1-17. The powers are extremely limited. To apply "nessecary and proper" to any law congress dreams up then enacts violates the enumberated powers both in scope and in spirit.

Now on the other hand, Article 1 section 10 addresses that which the various States "shall not" do. So if a state's constitution provides for education, it certainly may do so as there is no express prohibition.

Not sure I ever welcomed you to the forum. I have to say it is good to have you here... A lot of our friends on the forum want to bend the freedoms that they have had protected by the constitution to their respective frame of mind. It's good to have what appears to be a constitutional historian on board to put any and either of us in their perspective place..... Oh I forgot obama was a constitutional scholar as well...... Guess we'll see what happens.....

[Joe234]

How is Obama having armed security for his kids hypocritical? He is the President isn't he?
Does this mean by the same standard each adult citizen should have secret service protection?
If not he's hypocritical according to the NRA's standard.

[Zimobog]

I appreciate you actually have used the Constitution as your basis. So despite our differences we are at least speaking the same language . Can we agree that the Constitution is the highest law of the land and should be followed?

Where we differ on "nessecary and proper" is that the clause refers to laws nessecary and proper toward the implementation of the enumberated powers, found also in Article 1 section 8 paragraphs 1-17. The powers are extremely limited. To apply "nessecary and proper" to any law congress dreams up then enacts violates the enumberated powers both in scope and in spirit.

Now on the other hand, Article 1 section 10 addresses that which the various States "shall not" do. So if a state's constitution provides for education, it certainly may do so as there is no express prohibition.

[Crow]

I've been wrong before plenty of times. Perhaps there is actually a Constitutional basis and I missed it?

And I would rather agree for different reasons than disagree for the same reason. Lol

We just have different political ideology...

However, I would like to point out the "Necessary and Proper Clause"

The Congress shall have Power - To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.

[Zimobog]

I've been wrong before plenty of times. Perhaps there is actually a Constitutional basis and I missed it?

And I would rather agree for different reasons than disagree for the same reason. Lol

[Crow]

Quite nearly 100% of them will not harm anyone with said firearms. What mental difficulties will we exclude? PSTD? Depression after a rough divorce or chemotherapy? Admission into a treatment facility for OCD? ADD in childhood? Alcohol or past drug abuse history? Even now, admission of "use of illegal substances including marijuana" bars a person from legal firearms purchase in the US. I am concered where we decide whom is capable of possessing their natural rights as a freeperson, and whom we deny.

Those that have been adjudicated for being mentally ill would be a good start.

The reason I agree is because there is no Constitutional basis for the government to provide education or facilities for education.

... and that's where our concurrence ends.

[Zimobog]

There are guns. There are people with mental difficulties. There are people with mental difficulties with guns.

Quite nearly 100% of them will not harm anyone with said firearms. What mental difficulties will we exclude? PSTD? Depression after a rough divorce or chemotherapy? Admission into a treatment facility for OCD? ADD in childhood? Alcohol or past drug abuse history? Even now, admission of "use of illegal substances including marijuana" bars a person from legal firearms purchase in the US. I am concered where we decide whom is capable of possessing their natural rights as a freeperson, and whom we deny.

I agree with Crow's point about security in schools not being a governmental concern. The reason I agree is because there is no Constitutional basis for the government to provide education or facilities for education.

In my version of a perfect world the owners of schools would be in charge of security and people would choose schools based on security options and the educational criteria that best suits their needs.

[Crow]

I've said it before, and I'll say it again -- Armed guards in schools is something that should be decided by the school district, and not the government. Some districts already have armed security in place, and some don't.

Personally, I think it's unnecessary. We need sensible gun laws (that won't violate the second amendment) and we seriously need to examine how we are handling mental health problems in this country.

-------------

If we don't approach the issue of mental health, then no conceivable gun law will make this country any safer.

[Zimobog]

Gun permits were invented so that police could make sure black people couldn't have guns unless they were one of the "good ones".

A permit or license is a grant to do that which would otherwise be illegal.

I'm not sure if you live in the US, Wickedkitchen, but I don't ask permission from anyone to be armed.

[WickedKitchen]

I actually think that armed guards in the schools would have more of a negative effect than a positive one. The open visual display of weapons on a regular basis would have to desensitize a child to some degree. This shouldn't be what we expect our kids to see.

I took a firearms safety course with my wife last summer. I had every intention of purchasing a firearm. Life has gotten away from me and now after the most recent incident I feel odd about submitting my application. I find it hard to believe that the Chief of Police would not have his opinion of my intentions regardless of what my reasons are. I don't want to be "that guy"

Now, I'd be happy enough with a range permit because I don't have any intention of carrying it on my person at any time. Maybe on some backwoods hikes but I haven't even gone out there far enough to need one yet. I do intend on it in the future but as of yet it's not needed. If society broke down to the point where I felt I needed to carry one I don't think that the permit would mean very much.

[SnusoMatic]

i think the NRA is our best hope right now for overturning Obama's bs illegal executive order. By the way I agree with that commercial too and I don't think it's stupid, in bad taste or anything. I am sick of Obama's bs. if he is going to stand up in public and talk about "the children" to get his way then comparing his kids to ours is fair. No one said his kids names or anything about his kids. Everyone knows he has kids without being told by that commercial. The left has to find a way to demonize the NRA.

Obama violated our Constitution, you know that document he swore to protect? It's not the first time he has violated the Constitution either. He does that and people find fault with the NRA? A legal, independent organization supported by legal paying members. Like it or not the NRA is strong because they have private membership not because they are backed by any government agency. The people as in 'we the people', those people. and no I am not in the NRA but dang if I might join. At least they are going about this the legal way.

I did not vote for Obama but I did not vote for Romney either. I voted for the best man by writing in Ron Paul. Since Obama has been president I have not rallied for him but I have not directly put him down like some have. I have my reasons but I have made sure not to just ding him for anything. I have even took up for him to a degree at my own home. But today, I say...

Impeach Obama!


for violation of The Constitution. He absolutely is trying to be a dictator or a king. Get him out of the White House before he has us eating rice three times a day.

btw, what i said don't have anything to do with if we should have armed guards in schools. that's a complicated subject.

[Snusdog]

How come we guard our gold with guns and our children with hope?

That just might be the quote of the month.....

and why do CA schools need the national guard.........with all the gangs.....no punk is going to walk up in there and try to shoot the place up....and if he does.......Jesus Ramiro Iglesias will cap his white Nietzsche reading honkey ass


EDIT: That is possibly the worst thing I have ever written..........I know it's wrong........I'm just not sure where

[Zimobog]

Sgreger1 had a good point. What would be the problem with teachers exercising their right to be armed?

How come we guard our gold with guns and our children with hope?

[lxskllr]

For those who can't view yotube at work, what is the video of? Is this the one where they are like "President Obama has armed guards protecting his children, so why would he deny that to the rest of your kids"?

I think the idea of armed guards at schools is stupid. one school shooting and we react the same way we always do, we have to DO something immediately, we are so reactionary. The democrats in CA have beent rying to get teh national guard and other armed forces to be posted up at schools to protect the children as well, I think both them and the NRA are whacky as the last thing we need is more goons being paid to provide us with the fake sense of security that America seems to love so much.

I am in favor of allowing teachers to concealed carry at school though, if they elect to do so.

They're saying Obama is a hypocritical elitist since his kids get armed guards, but the kids of proles don't.

I don't have much of an opinion one way or the other, except I don't think schools need armed guards.

[Darwin]

Since membership in the NRA has skyrocketed by a quarter of a million since November the idea that anything will be their "downfall" seem a bit, shall we say, premature.