You can't be more incorrect. I remember a conversation I had with my Uncle when the inflation of the carter years was starting to come down under Regan. He was complaining about high interest rates how nobody could afford to buy things with a 20+% interest rate on credit cards. I was in 8th or 9th grade and asked why are the rates so high. He said because the banks want to make a bunch of money. I asked why the government can't make a law to lower the rates. He said because it's a feee country. I said, well that doesn't make since, if it's better to have the government lower the rates we should give up being a free country. This about the only time I've ever seen him lose his temper. He said he didn't fight in the Vietnam war and spend 20 years of his life in the military for the new generation to just give up their freedoms. That one brief conversation changed my perspective for life. It really hit home, and I'm surprised at how much I go back to it. Our freedoms shall not be infringed, even if we don't like what other people are doing with them.
Sounds like a liberal argument....you don't know me, but generalize about how I will react. For the record, the 2nd amendment is one I think there should very few, if any exceptions, and right now there are too many and the states are going too far in limiting the second...
There used to be a phrase that conservatives held dear ... "I may not support what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." I adhere to that principle.
Also, for the record, I agree with your disgust and the article linked that the media is over hyping and creating panic. But, in a free society, they have a right to do that, and I have a right to find OAN or other outlets like thedonald.win.
When the government tries to limit our rights, when does it stop, and do we really want to roll the dice on the judge that hears the case? The solution to blatant hysteria is to use liability laws like the covington kids. They might have a right to say what theyt want, but if it damages me they are liable.
I'm confused as to what you are arguing...first you say take away free speech for those you don't like, then you accuse me of kinda of supporting the 2nd, and now it appears as if you are kinda supporting the 2nd. So, let me try to make it simple. I don't trust the government to make exceptions because at first, the exceptions make sense, then they push the bounds, like they are doing with abortion. Yes, the arguments make sense on "some" or "reasonable" restrictions...Don't Yell Fire in a crowded theater, Does the right to keep Arms means the right to wage war? No, but where is the line between the two...Tanks, Rocket Launchers, and other type of weaponry are weapons of war not "arms" ...but again, now where is the line...AK47 assault rifle tear gas canisters? I don't know, and am open for a debate, although this is my opinion, and I'm not a legal scholar... This is kind of like pornography....I may not be able to define it but I know it when I see it. Bottom line, the left always seems assured they know where the line is and how to draw it for us. The rights seems to understand the point, and try to draw reasonable lines. But the Left has gotten away with this too long, and taken advantage of the right to push the line too far left.
You can't be more incorrect. I remember a conversation I had with my Uncle when the inflation of the carter years was starting to come down under Regan. He was complaining about high interest rates how nobody could afford to buy things with a 20+% interest rate on credit cards. I was in 8th or 9th grade and asked why are the rates so high. He said because the banks want to make a bunch of money. I asked why the government can't make a law to lower the rates. He said because it's a feee country. I said, well that doesn't make since, if it's better to have the government lower the rates we should give up being a free country. This about the only time I've ever seen him lose his temper. He said he didn't fight in the Vietnam war and spend 20 years of his life in the military for the new generation to just give up their freedoms. That one brief conversation changed my perspective for life. It really hit home, and I'm surprised at how much I go back to it. Our freedoms shall not be infringed, even if we don't like what other people are doing with them.
Sounds like a liberal argument....you don't know me, but generalize about how I will react. For the record, the 2nd amendment is one I think there should very few, if any exceptions, and right now there are too many and the states are going too far in limiting the second...
There used to be a phrase that conservatives held dear ... "I may not support what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." I adhere to that principle.
Also, for the record, I agree with your disgust and the article linked that the media is over hyping and creating panic. But, in a free society, they have a right to do that, and I have a right to find OAN or other outlets like thedonald.win.
When the government tries to limit our rights, when does it stop, and do we really want to roll the dice on the judge that hears the case? The solution to blatant hysteria is to use liability laws like the covington kids. They might have a right to say what theyt want, but if it damages me they are liable.
I'm confused as to what you are arguing...first you say take away free speech for those you don't like, then you accuse me of kinda of supporting the 2nd, and now it appears as if you are kinda supporting the 2nd. So, let me try to make it simple. I don't trust the government to make exceptions because at first, the exceptions make sense, then they push the bounds, like they are doing with abortion. Yes, the arguments make sense on "some" or "reasonable" restrictions...Don't Yell Fire in a crowded theater, Does the right to keep Arms means the right to wage war? No, but where is the line between the two...Tanks, Rocket Launchers, and other type of weaponry are weapons of war not "arms" ...but again, now where is the line...AK47 assault rifle tear gas canisters? I don't know, and am open for a debate, although this is my opinion, and I'm not a legal scholar... This is kind of like pornography....I may not be able to define it but I know it when I see it. Bottom line, the left always seems assured they know where the line is and how to draw it for us. The rights seems to understand the point, and try to draw reasonable lines. But the Left has gotten away with this too long, and taken advantage of the right to push the line too far left.