Bipartisan Senate group proposes ‘no fly, no buy’ gun measure

[Bob Butler 54]

(11-29-2018, 07:31 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: The military is not a "privileged group." Neither are the national guard or the police. They work for the people as their sovereign. Our government does not recognize the validity of a militia whose purpose is to overthrow or resist the government, even if right-wing and some left-wing rebels do recognize such validity.

One of the states put a justification phrase on their right of free speech.  It says in effect that as law makers have to speak freely to debate legislation, the People have a right of free speech.   Under the Jim Crow theory, legislatures are a group which are privileged by immunity from persecution of free speech.  They would be a privileged group.  Under the standard model, the People are a group of the whole, thus everybody has free speech.

No one believes in the in the Jim Crow interpretation of the text except those who wish to destroy human rights.  The whole purpose of the Jim Crow court was to destroy the rights of blacks.  They pretended to believe the founding fathers intended to create rights only for the government employees, not the People.  Rights are limited to government employees, be it legislators or militias.  That is an absurd interpretation.  I am a standard model individual rights guy.

Of course, there is a lot you have to read into the founding fathers, implied clauses like "This applies to white male Protestants only."  Our standards are much different today.  Most blues apply the equality rights to far more people these days, to females and minorities.  Some folks are not yet believers in equality, still strive towards prejudice.  I see them as in error, as advancing an old and wrong way of thinking.

(11-29-2018, 07:31 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: I never quite understood why people out on a farm with acres and acres between themselves and the next farmhouse, with any sizeable city 100-odd miles away, need to worry about burglars. And in any case, there are much better ways to protect yourself than guns. We've gone over all these ad infinitum.

In an era of recreational drugs, everybody has to worry about burglars.  They are not limited to urban parts of the population, as you would know if you knew the culture.  The reds know red culture.

(11-29-2018, 07:31 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: I can understand a bit better why a ranch might be threatened by a coyote, etc. I think there are better ways than shooting the invading animal, but they may not be readily available to the average rancher. Some small minority of rural people might get benefit from hunting besides just as an unnecessary and destructive sport. And such sports certainly do not need Ar-15s and the like; that is not sporting at all. It is too bad that the red rural side is so uncompromising on the gun issue and live in the Fox News bubble on this. Compromises on issues like guns and abortions are possible, but the right-wing is too fanatical, fear-based and dogmatic to deal with these days. And that's partly because of the powerful organizations pushing the extreme right point of view for their own gain, and their ability to buy politicians. Too bad.

And you are not fanatical, fear based and dogmatic? Pot, kettle. Kettle, pot.  You are insisting they live by a culture based on how people live far away, a culture based on a far different population density.   You are set in your beliefs, totally unwilling to listen, locked into an adversarial way of thinking.  The result is at best dysfunctional.  One size does not fit all.  Wake up and grow up.