Posted on 08/22/2008 4:04:17 PM PDT by neverdem
Firearms
We recognize that the right to bear arms is an important part of the American tradition, and we will preserve Americans’ continued Second Amendment right to own and use firearms. We believe that the right to own firearms is subject to reasonable regulation, but we know that what works in Chicago may not work in Cheyenne. We can work together to enact and enforce common-sense laws and improvements, like closing the gun show loophole, improving our background check system and reinstating the assault weapons ban, so that guns do not fall into the hands of terrorists or criminals. Acting responsibly and with respect for differing views on this issue, we can both protect the constitutional right to bear arms and keep our communities and our children safe.
(Excerpt) Read more at marcambinder.theatlantic.com ...
According to Wayne LaPierre, in his section "What They Didn't Tell You Today," of August 21, 2008, on the NRA's homepage, the above excerpt is the section on firearms from a draft of the DNC's platform. It's lines 11 - 20 from page 43 of the original document, page 46 of 54 on my pdf page counter.
The section "What They Didn't Tell You Today," can't be copied and pasted, so I own any errors even though I copied from the pdf link, and I'll appreciate any corrections. I have no doubt that there are other interesting sections of their platform, but this is the section that primarily made me choose my screen name.
Interesting view of what a right is. Do they hold the same relative view on speech and religion as well?
well, thats dem tactics,,just say they support something and do the opposite
(We recognize that the right to bear arms is an important part of the American tradition, and we will preserve Americans’ continued Second Amendment right to own and use firearms. We believe that the right to own firearms is subject to reasonable regulation, but we know that what works in Chicago may not work in Cheyenne. )
TWO points Dems.
1. the right to bear arms is not a “tradition” it is a garuanteed Constitutional Right.
2. What ohter Constitutional Right should we vary according to where an American lives? How about the right to an abortion? What works for Chicago may not work in Cheyenne.
Wihter it is EVERY citizns right or it is not. If it is not then YOU should work to change the Constitution.
The dumb sheeple will drink it up and keep saying YAY!! and after the election its back to business as usual.
What gun control legislation "works" in Chicago? Chicago has completely banned handgun ownership, and has the second highest murder rate in the Country.
Statements like this from the Dimbocrat party just make me laugh out loud.
Time to get myself an AR-15, I s’pose they count as “a salt weapon”.
Considering speech codes apparent in colleges, and McLame-Feingold, I’d say yes.
I’ll say it, because nobody else does anymore.
They’re fascistic communists that will probably implement Maoist plans once control is assured.
Reasonable regulation means complete banning of all firearms eventually. This is simply a blatant attempt to pull the wool over the eyes of the voters in regards to the dems anti-gun agenda.
By letting law abiding citizens have guns and making sure that street gangs do some serious time whenever they either have one in their possession or use it in a crime. If any kid under 18 who has one (as in a gang member passing the gun to them) they they're in the lockup until they're 21 .....
They’re fascistic communists that will probably implement Maoist plans once control is assured.
Rule #1. You cannot have organs of internal security with out internal enemies.
Rule #2. If you don’t have internal enemies, make them.
Obama Sued in Philadelphia Federal Court (Constitutionally Ineligible for the Presidency)
Alice In Obamaland (IBD Series: The Audacity Of Socialism)
The Triumph of Putinism - Understanding the Russian-Georgian conflict
From time to time, I’ll ping on noteworthy articles about politics, foreign and military affairs. FReepmail me if you want on or off my list.
“We believe that the right to own firearms is subject to reasonable regulation...”
So, why would this right be subject to ‘reasonable regulation’ and not the others?
And, who determines what’s reasonable?
Nope, don’t fall for this stupidity. SCOTUS has clearly spoken on the validity and extent of the Second Amendment. Attempts to re-interpret that decision should be recognized as pure, unadulterated Judicial Activism.
It’s all in the tag line...
And, get plenty of those hi-cap magazines, too. They were on the list the last time, IIRC.
If the solid waste contacts the rotating turbulence generator, you’ll need more than one...many more than one.
.....SCOTUS has clearly spoken .....
It’s settled law..... therefore it can be broken with praise to the lawbreakers.
Same old statist/collectivist BS!
No, but what works in Cheyenne would definitely work in Chicago. Morons. It's an inalienable right, not a privelege.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.