Posted on 07/25/2012 4:48:11 PM PDT by Kaslin
It’s cut and dried.
No debate on anything needed. 2A trumps and guarantees all.
>> “they’ve succeeded in framing the issue as one of essential American national values”
Yeah, the truth usually wins in the court of public opinion, given enough time.
Dear Chuck,
It’s simply not possible to have a “’Rational Policy Debate’ About Gun Control” for the simple reason that the gun-grabbers like yourself are irrational when it comes to guns.
The anti-gunners generally rely on emotional arguments when it comes to gun control, and consequently those who espouse those arguments tent to react like religious cult members when one makes reasoned responses to their arguments, or presents evidence contrary to their beliefs.
Mark
nobody has sort of a rational policy debate about it.
Yea, right. Like the ratinal policy debate the left wants to have over restrictions on abortion (which is only a "right" because some liberal justices found it in the penumbra of the Constitution - while the RTKABA is an enumerated right).
Meanwhile another 50,000 viewers abandoned the network, for Fox News Channel.
Perhaps instead of emoting like hysteric children, the fascist clown poss in the junk media can try to explain to us how taking guns away from law abiding citizens does anything to stop violent criminals
You said it, because there is no such thing
>>A rational debate on guns would involve hysteric emotion driven clowns like Todd to actually try THINKING about the issue for a change.<<
The national debate on guns took place between 1776 and 1784. The results of that debate was enshrined in the 2nd Amendment.
There should be nothing more to discuss.
She was actually safe at home the day that her husband - denied the right of self-defense - was murdered by a lunatic.
That hasn't stopped her from dining out on her husband's corpse for decades, however.
“NBC’s Todd Whines Over Lack of ‘Rational Policy Debate’ About Gun Control”
TRANSLATION: “We MSNBC Klux Klansters want to make GUN CONTROL an Election issue! Why does nobody want to talk about GUN CONTROL???”
What part of “shall not be infringed” is open to debate?
The term ‘correspondent’ used to be a synonym to reporter who’s job is to specify facts as opposed to commentator who’s stock-in-trade is opinion and analysis of the facts. On NBC there used to be the news and then someone like John Chancellor would comment upon a topic.
This is, I know, so 19th century, let alone 20th. It is a loss and these practitioners murder truth in favor of their self-defined social justice mantras. I cannot remember the last time that I watched an entire news program from one of the MSM alphabet networks and I believe that I am more fully informed than the majority of their staffers and correspondents. A shame of their own making!
DING!DING!DING!DING! WE HAVE A WINNER!
However, liberal/socialist/democrats hate it when they can't change the rules in the middle of a game so they're attempting a "do-over".
I don’t understand what Todd means by “rational policy debate”. We’ve had numerous policy debates on the issue and the answer to an irrational “I’m upset and so you have to give me whatever I want to feel better” is a perfectly rational “no”.
Repeal the Brady Background checks.
Repeal GCA 68
Fire Harry Reid, Feinstein and Pelosi
See? It's easy..
No madam, you do not own the right to speak. While we all understand your loss (and have our sympathy for that loss), your opinion on this issue weighs no more than anyone else.
The Constitution specifically says "shall not be infringed" with respect to firearms. Any law restricting the type and how many of a particular firarm I amy own is an infringement.
The only thing that you may have some legitimate purview over is the location, and possibly the manner in which those firearms may be discharged. Nothing else.
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.