Fire Mission: Amend the 2nd Amendment poll - Page 2

General » General Discussion

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Fire Mission: Amend the 2nd Amendment poll (Page 2 of 3)

Posted: 9/4/2013 12:16:07 PM EDT

[#1]

By all means, if violent rebellion is your wish, amend the 2nd. Hell, remove it completely.

Posted: 9/4/2013 12:19:06 PM EDT

[#2]

Hit

Posted: 9/4/2013 12:25:13 PM EDT

[#3]

tapped

Posted: 9/4/2013 12:27:58 PM EDT

[#4]

Stupid idea, but at least this particular anti-freedom group is going about promoting their idiot agenda in the proper way, that's exactly what the amendment process is for.

Posted: 9/4/2013 12:29:15 PM EDT

[#5]

HIT!

Posted: 9/4/2013 12:38:58 PM EDT

[#6]

So, let me see if I have this right? Only the national guard and federal state and local law enforcement would be allowed to keep guns, right?

SO REJECTED!

Posted: 9/4/2013 12:42:50 PM EDT

[#7]

Approve 10.4%

Reject 89.6%

Total votes 742

We are winning, keep it up!

Posted: 9/4/2013 1:00:33 PM EDT

[#8]

Hit both and commented.

Posted: 9/4/2013 1:02:34 PM EDT

[#9]

Hit

Posted: 9/4/2013 1:06:11 PM EDT

[#10]

Hit and Hit

Posted: 9/4/2013 1:06:51 PM EDT

[#11]

Hit like a deceased Chicago Democrat. Early and often.

Posted: 9/4/2013 1:07:13 PM EDT

[#12]

Hit.

Posted: 9/4/2013 1:08:23 PM EDT

[#13]

hit

Posted: 9/4/2013 1:10:07 PM EDT

[#14]

Hit. 87% rejected.

Posted: 9/4/2013 1:13:05 PM EDT

[#15]

Quoted:
A group calling themselves the National Constitution Center would like to amend the 2nd Amendment.

This is how they want it to read:

[span style='font-weight: bold;']“Because a well-regulated National Guard and Reserve, and well-regulated Federal, state, and local public safety departments, are necessary to the security of our free states and our free nation, the rights of citizens, while serving in their capacity in the aforesaid organizations, to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”

View Quote

Basically like saying, "A militarized police state is necessary for security, so no limit on on the extent of police militarization."

Clearly not what the Founders had in mind.

Posted: 9/4/2013 1:13:37 PM EDT

[#16]

make the link cold in the OP

First Link
Approve 106 (11.4%)
Reject 826 (88.6%)
Total votes = 932

Second Link
Reject 87.82% (447 votes)
Approve 12.18% (62 votes)
Total Votes: 509

Posted: 9/4/2013 1:13:58 PM EDT

[#17]

Rejected on both sites.

Posted: 9/4/2013 1:14:26 PM EDT

[#18]

I hit both polls, for what it's worth. Not sure if these polls are worth my time, since anyone can vote multiple times and the results mean absolutely zero. I guess if it makes an anti uncomfortable then it serves some useful purpose.

Posted: 9/4/2013 1:17:38 PM EDT

[#19]

hit

Posted: 9/4/2013 1:25:12 PM EDT

[#20]

Hit.

Posted: 9/4/2013 1:25:39 PM EDT

[#21]

Hit

Comments closed lol.

Wish I had a chance to see some of your creative responses. Oh well. I guess the statists aren't really interested in having an open conversation after all...

Posted: 9/4/2013 1:30:47 PM EDT

[#22]

Hit both.
This is how it works in EVERY totalitarian country; lose your State job, lose your "right" to keep and bear arms, which never was a Right to begin with! Whoever wrote this doesn't believe that physically disabled people have a Right to self defense?

Posted: 9/4/2013 1:32:22 PM EDT

[#23]

Thank you for voting!

Reject 89.05% (504 votes)

Approve 10.95% (62 votes)

Total Votes: 566

Posted: 9/4/2013 1:33:44 PM EDT

[#24]

Hit.

Posted: 9/4/2013 1:37:15 PM EDT

[#25]

hit

Posted: 9/4/2013 1:39:09 PM EDT

[#26]

Thank you for voting!
Reject 89.56% (532 votes)

Approve 10.44% (62 votes)

Total Votes: 594

Posted: 9/4/2013 1:40:13 PM EDT

[#27]

Read that VERY closely.

Only the cops and military should have guns, is what it's saying.

You'd have to be a TOTAL idiot to agree with that.

Posted: 9/4/2013 1:42:31 PM EDT

[#28]

Reject 89.67% (538 votes)

Approve 10.33% (62 votes)

Hit

Posted: 9/4/2013 1:43:10 PM EDT

[#29]

HIT!!!!!!!

Do you approve or reject the Right To Bear Arms amendment as proposed here?
Approve 118 (10.6%)
Reject 993 (89.4%)
Total votes = 1111

Posted: 9/4/2013 1:45:25 PM EDT

[#30]

Hit!!!! scummy cocksuckers, everyone of them.

Posted: 9/4/2013 1:45:50 PM EDT

[#31]

hit

Posted: 9/4/2013 1:46:42 PM EDT

[#32]

Posted: 9/4/2013 1:47:23 PM EDT

[#33]

From the link,
"PROPOSED AMENDMENT: “Because a well-regulated National Guard and Reserve, and well-regulated Federal, state, and local public safety departments, are necessary to the security of our free states and our free nation, the rights of citizens, while serving in their capacity in the aforesaid organizations, to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”

What the fuck are they trying to say? It's almost as if they say because there is a national guard, police etc that there is no need for armed citizens.

Posted: 9/4/2013 1:48:52 PM EDT

[#34]

"The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

[/amendment]

Posted: 9/4/2013 1:51:43 PM EDT

[#35]

Hit it hard. These fricking people are nuts!

Posted: 9/4/2013 1:51:46 PM EDT

[#36]

Hit:

Do you approve or reject the Right To Bear Arms amendment as proposed here?
Approve 118 (10.6%)
Reject 993 (89.4%)
Total votes = 1111

The wording of this is absolutely stupid as it places the responsibility for ones protection with someone else. Only a Liberal would think of this due to their desire to be accountable for nothing.

Posted: 9/4/2013 1:52:36 PM EDT

[#37]

Hit It

Approve 118 (10.6%)
Reject 993 (89.4%)
Total votes = 1111

Then hit again

Reject 89.98% (575 votes)

Approve 10.02% (64 votes)

Total Votes: 639

Posted: 9/4/2013 1:58:55 PM EDT

[#38]

Hit.

I wonder which left wing organization is running that website.

Posted: 9/4/2013 2:12:50 PM EDT

[#39]

Hit!

Posted: 9/4/2013 2:15:34 PM EDT

[#40]

Hit it.

Posted: 9/4/2013 2:19:59 PM EDT

[#41]

Hit . Keep up the good work, reject 90.1%

Posted: 9/4/2013 2:24:09 PM EDT

[#42]

Hit both to reject.

Posted: 9/4/2013 2:25:40 PM EDT

[#43]

Hit both again from home

Posted: 9/4/2013 2:29:49 PM EDT

[#44]

Hit it. Good news is it is 91% oppose and 9% for. Guess these aren't the 90% the anti gunners are looking for.

Posted: 9/4/2013 2:31:06 PM EDT

[#45]

Quote History

Quoted:

Approve 10.4%

Reject 89.6%

Total votes 742

We are winning smashing that shit, keep it up!

View Quote

fify, with a smile on my face.

Posted: 9/4/2013 2:32:21 PM EDT

[#46]

Quote History

Quoted:

From the link,

"PROPOSED AMENDMENT: "Because a well-regulated National Guard and Reserve, and well-regulated Federal, state, and local public safety departments, are necessary to the security of our free states and our free nation, the rights of citizens, while serving in their capacity in the aforesaid organizations, to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”

What the fuck are they trying to say? It's almost as if they say because there is a national guard, police etc that there is no need for armed citizens.

View Quote

That's precisely what they're saying.