The first response by ADOCS was the most intelligent
because he (she?) understands that when liberals talk of control they talk in terms of steps. When they say “lets ban automatic weapons” they mean “lets start with this and then we will ban this next and then this next”
If liberals would come out and say “we recognize the civilians right of protection in the second amendment , we will stipulate that we need to guarantee those rights, lets compromise” Then a lot more people would be willing to have this conversation with them . but we recognize the deceit implicit in their words.
and also
why is the second amendment the only one we need to compromise on? why not the first also? Is all speech really good? shouldn’t we ban some speech also?
Menu