reactions

[John Galt]

9/11 --> Patriot Act, and other things leading to loss of privacy in your correspondence
Richard Reid --> now we all take off our shoes when entering the airport like we're in a mosque
Sandy Hook --> calls for removal of second amendment by people like saz "for the children"
dumbshit who was spurned by some black chick probably goes and shoots up a church --> banning of confederate flag

is it me or do we go overboard on our reactions? granted, one of these is not like the others and needed a firm response, but that didn't mean we should have enabled our NSA to be eavesdropping on all our correspondence. i mean, they saw our dick pics guys. i'm not saying these things are reichtags, but i will say some politicans are expertly capitalizing on tragedy to enable policy that otherwise would be repulsive to americans and often unconstitutional

[Indy]

[Dylan]

[John Galt]

[Ben Huh]

[John Galt]

[Indy]

[John Galt]

[Saz]

The alternative is the court simply interpreting the second amendment in a different manner. We went through this like 10 threads ago. The constitution is not a static document so to pretend as if your interpretation is the only one is the absolute height if ignorance and stupidity. So yes, indy is right, you are creating a false choice. No one wants to repeal the second amendment, it's in the bill of rights! I simply want it interpreted in line with the founding father and with common sense. I'm sorry your autism prevents you from understanding things like compassion or nuance, but on issues like this is really best to let a person with the capacity to understand both do the talking.

Now run along, I see see by your ridiculous point about the confederate flag that you also have quite a bit of learning to do on the first amendment.

[uebermann]