Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

caseymoz

(5,763 posts)

3. I think you've got a great idea.

Reply to still_one (Original post)

Sun Jul 22, 2012, 10:16 AM

Jul 2012

Especially after 2008 after a certain protester showed up at Obama's campaign rally with an assault rifle, just to practice his right to free speech. If guns are such an important right, then who is Congress or the SCOTUS to limit it? Besides, if only assassins and lobbyists had guns in those buildings, how would honest citizens ever protect our government officials?

What's good for the citizens is also good for our representatives and protectors of our rights.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

31 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Since congress and so many people are concerned about their gun rights, even to the point of passing [View all] still_one Jul 2012 OP

Word! By these cretins' logic, guns should be allowed Surya Gayatri Jul 2012 #1

The Capitol, Airlines, permatex Jul 2012 #2

But as I've always heard caseymoz Jul 2012 #6

The police are rarely there to prevent a crime permatex Jul 2012 #11

You are missing the point Travis_0004 Jul 2012 #26

I did? My satire went over your head. caseymoz Jul 2012 #30

It seems you have missed my point. Why are weapons allowed in a lot of places, but not Congress? still_one Jul 2012 #7

It's a definite possibility permatex Jul 2012 #12

need to consider it. Though we are paying for their security with checkpoints /nt still_one Jul 2012 #15

Thank you for the civil conversation permatex Jul 2012 #20

Please don't thank me for that. The whole point I think is to persuade each other why a position still_one Jul 2012 #24

I wouldn't say their life is worth more, but they are definitely more likely to be targetted Incitatus Jul 2012 #28

Don't quite get ... 99Forever Jul 2012 #18

Leave it to you to introduce the insults permatex Jul 2012 #19

All those things restrict people's right to bear arms. kestrel91316 Jul 2012 #27

Hyperbole is not your strong suit permatex Jul 2012 #29

I think you've got a great idea. caseymoz Jul 2012 #3

Of course they may believe that an ordinary citizens life has less worth than theirs? /nt still_one Jul 2012 #8

Of course they do permatex Jul 2012 #13

I guess that explains also why their healthcare and pensions are much better than the average person still_one Jul 2012 #14

Ya know, permatex Jul 2012 #21

I think we have a better chance because of ACA to evolve in single payer than without it, but I still_one Jul 2012 #23

I'm with ya permatex Jul 2012 #25

Sure yeah.. ananda Jul 2012 #4

Gun Bless America. Comrade_McKenzie Jul 2012 #5

Many wouldn't have a problem. hack89 Jul 2012 #9

definitely. no filibusters /nt still_one Jul 2012 #16

You got a point nadinbrzezinski Jul 2012 #10

Should be renamed to the TSG permatex Jul 2012 #22

Of course not malaise Jul 2012 #17

Agreed Tsiyu Jul 2012 #31