TexasCHLforum.com

Color me southern, but I have read 20 articles about the Heller case and the responses from the DC police, San Fran, etc.. and they continue stating that semi-automatic weapons are still prohibited. I don't speak yankee or californian. I understand what semi-auto is, do they?

True liberals believe citizens have the right to own and carry weapons without government interference.

Those people you're quoting are fascists, communists, and other varieties of wannabe tyrants. They know exactly what a semi auto handgun is, and how it can be used to fight criminals and tyrants, which is precisely why they don't want American citizens to have them.

They're playing games. They're pretending to not understand the Heller decision. They think if they allow the good guys to own single shot flintlock handguns, they can pretend that any other restrictions are allowed. Ban semi autos. Ban revolvers. Ban ammunition. Single shot flintlock pistols are handguns so if they allow them they haven't completely banned handguns and then they can pretend they're not violating one of the most basic human rights.

They're no better than the rapists they empower and they'll burn in eternity for their sins, but that's little consolation for their victims in this life.

They are no more ignorant of the meaning than those that pass on their propaganda. They want the general public ignorant because that is the only way Liberalism can be shoved down our throats. If people pay attention then they can do nothing. In short this is a tactic used by these tyrants to strip people of their God given, Constitutionally guaranteed, Supreme Court identified, Civil right to keep and bear arms.

I have never heard a Liberal politician say anything that isn't either a half-truth or a full out lie.

boomerang wrote:True liberals believe citizens have the right to own and carry weapons without government interference.

Those people you're quoting are fascists, communists, and other varieties of wannabe tyrants. They know exactly what a semi auto handgun is, and how it can be used to fight criminals and tyrants, which is precisely why they don't want American citizens to have them.

Boomerang,

With due respect, considering we have differed considerably in the past, I find it relatively hard to distinguish a "true liberal" from most of the democrats. I have an aunt and uncle by marriage who claim to be democrats. When asked, they frankly cannot answer why. When I bring up my top 10... RKBA, immigration, partial birth abortion, gay marriage, taxes, etc...they agree with me. Unfortunately for America however, the cards are on the table. Over and over again. From the 20 or so people who voted against the texas castle doctrine (all democrats, including Borris Miles who used the castle to shoot a copper thief), to the 4 who voted against the Heller case. I'd really like to see someone who can show that the "true liberals" make up a majority of democrats, and actually support RKBA.

lawrnk wrote:

boomerang wrote:True liberals believe citizens have the right to own and carry weapons without government interference.

Those people you're quoting are fascists, communists, and other varieties of wannabe tyrants. They know exactly what a semi auto handgun is, and how it can be used to fight criminals and tyrants, which is precisely why they don't want American citizens to have them.

Boomerang,

With due respect, considering we have differed considerably in the past, I find it relatively hard to distinguish a "true liberal" from most of the democrats. I have an aunt and uncle by marriage who claim to be democrats. When asked, they frankly cannot answer why. When I bring up my top 10... RKBA, immigration, partial birth abortion, gay marriage, taxes, etc...they agree with me. Unfortunately for America however, the cards are on the table. Over and over again. From the 20 or so people who voted against the texas castle doctrine (all democrats, including Borris Miles who used the castle to shoot a copper thief), to the 4 who voted against the Heller case. I'd really like to see someone who can show that the "true liberals" make up a majority of democrats, and actually support RKBA.

When he say's true liberal he's relating to the old school liberal, the anti-federalist, what is now called libertarian, basically the repubs and dems switched sides (remember, the war between the states started when the repubs took over the presidency with lincoln) and somehow the dems lost the libertarian side, became the new liberal and more socialist and northern, then the repubs lost the socialist side became the new conservative and a little libertarian (more so than modern dems) and came in the south. Many old-timers still vote straight democrat, hence dixiecrats, it used to more of a tradition to vote straight party than it is now.

Please feel free to correct me if I'm wrong or off base a bit

Thomas Jefferson was a "true liberal", which today is somewhat conservative, but most closely identified with libertarianism.

I am glad to side with TJ.

KBCraig wrote:Thomas Jefferson was a "true liberal", which today is somewhat conservative, but most closely identified with libertarianism.

I am glad to side with TJ.

Exactly

lawrnk wrote:Color me southern, but I have read 20 articles about the Heller case and the responses from the DC police, San Fran, etc.. and they continue stating that semi-automatic weapons are still prohibited. I don't speak yankee or californian. I understand what semi-auto is, do they?

Not like I'm trying to bring this back on track or anything, but the problem lies in the way the decision was worded.

"In addition, at least six States and Puerto Rico impose general bans on certain types of weapons, in particular assault weapons or semiautomatic weapons. See Cal. Penal Code §12280(b) (West Supp. 2008); Conn., ...."

As far as I can determine in reading the references that followed (I could find only a few on-line) the bans refered to semi-automatic versions of assault weapons, semi-auto machine pistols, and the like. I could not find a ban on semi-automatic handguns* (although there might be one in there). But the anti-gunners are taking this use of semi-automatic to be *any* semi-automatic weapon.

*A few on high-cap magazines but this didn't ban the guns itself.

KBCraig wrote:Thomas Jefferson was a "true liberal", which today is somewhat conservative, but most closely identified with libertarianism.

I am glad to side with TJ.

Yeah, I constantly get slammed by friends and family for being a "liberal" when I consider myself a libertarian who sides more with the founding fathers' beliefs.

The amount of civil liberties we've lost or had infringed in the last eight years is staggering to me; I want nothing to do with the so-called Republican party.

Robert Levy, the man behind the Heller could not be described as a Conservative. He doesn't belong to the NRA, nor even own a gun. yet he is the force that pusshed and even paid for this case. He is likely opposed to the drug war, big government and other conservative causes.

Liberty wrote:Robert Levy, the man behind the Heller could not be described as a Conservative. He doesn't belong to the NRA, nor even own a gun. yet he is the force that pusshed and even paid for this case. He is likely opposed to the drug war, big government and other conservative causes.

Sounds like a true patriot!

JasonH wrote:

KBCraig wrote:Thomas Jefferson was a "true liberal", which today is somewhat conservative, but most closely identified with libertarianism.

I am glad to side with TJ.

Yeah, I constantly get slammed by friends and family for being a "liberal" when I consider myself a libertarian who sides more with the founding fathers' beliefs.

The amount of civil liberties we've lost or had infringed in the last eight years is staggering to me; I want nothing to do with the so-called Republican party.

Well, Obama seems like a nice guy!

Speaking of Yankees, anyone seen Frankie the Yankee?

lawrnk wrote:Speaking of Yankees, anyone seen Frankie the Yankee?

He is banned.

Anygunanywhere