are the same people who oppose the warrentless wiretapping? Seems a bit hypocritical to me since they oppose the wiretapping because it infringes on our rights in the Constitution but so does getting rid of our guns
2007-01-20 01:29:39 · 9 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Yea, they want to barge into your home crack open your gunsafe and confiscate it's contents. But they can't stand the thought of perusing a terrorists e-mail.
Sheer, unadulterated hypocrisy. Thats the Left for you.
2007-01-20 01:33:52 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
They are scared that they would misuse guns. They inaccurately project that onto other people.
They correctly fear the government's drive for power.
"Government is not reason, it is not eloquence --it is force! Like fire it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master; never for a moment should it be left to irresponsible action." - George Washington (1732-1799), 1797?
"Every Communist must grasp the truth, 'Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun.' Our principle is that the [Communist] Party commands the gun and the gun will never be allowed to command the Party." - Mao Tse-tung (1893-1976), "Problems of War and Strategy," concluding speech at the sixth plenary session of the Central Committee, Communist party, China, November 6, 1938, in Selected Works of Mao Zedong Vol 2, p272 (1954 edition)
"Americans have the will to resist because you have weapons. If you don't have a gun, freedom of speech has no power." - Yoshimi Ishikawa, Japanese author, in the Los Angeles Times, October 15, 1992 [Ishikawa was commenting on the lack of protest with which Japanese tolerated governmental corruption.]
2007-01-20 07:04:46 · answer #2 · answered by jmwildenthal 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
We disagree. If we circulate alongside with your 'back interior the day' argument, you need to no longer be allowed to apply the internet to particular your 1st modification evaluations. As to the government and civilians battling - many armed forces workers might rightfully refuse to combat. " i'm no longer asserting background exams might've stopped mass shootings or criminals from having weapons - ( then what purpose does yet another regulation serve?) - , even though it actual might make it greater good - ( for regulation-abiding voters) - to get right of entry to/stockpile them." What different criminal product has as lots contemporary regulation to purchase as a firearm?
2016-12-12 15:56:45 · answer #3 · answered by ricaurte 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It is human nature, for pretty much all political viewpoints, for people not to have any problem banning that which they either do not understand, do not like, or do not partake in. Big city folks who are not generally allowed to own guns due to opressive laws forced upon them will have no problem banning or confiscating your guns, since confiscating yours is not taking away anything from them. The same holds true for cigarette bans, etc......
2007-01-22 00:12:19 · answer #4 · answered by NRA Lifer 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Its part of a whole world view based on non reality. I am always wondering how ignorant some people are on how the real world works. The world is how it is not how some psycology major do gooder wants it to be in their fantasy. Terrorists are our enemies and we should destroy them- I will use my guns to destroy my enemies not learn to "understand them"
2007-01-20 01:41:45 · answer #5 · answered by crackleboy 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Strangely, those same people were pretty much silent when Clinton started looking thru email.
It's not about the war... it's about politics and power.
2007-01-20 01:35:41 · answer #6 · answered by geek49203 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
They only believe in the parts of the Constitution that suit them and their rediculous ideals.
2007-01-20 01:35:13 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
Even more liberal hypocrisy
2007-01-20 01:35:41 · answer #8 · answered by ? 3 · 2⤊ 2⤋
they "hate" what they don't understand.
2007-01-20 01:33:33 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋