Defensive Carry banner

1 - 20 of 25 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
28 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
So, if you were in a position where you were able to ask an election candidate one question, what would be the ultimate question that would trap them into revealing their true belief of what the Second Amendment means?

For example if we ask: "Do you support the Second Amendment?"
We would get the usual banter of, "Yes, I believe every law biding citizen should be able to protect themselves and hunt."

How about if we ask: "Do you believe the Second Amendment is important for securing our freedoms?" Or even, "important for national security?"

How would you state the question, and how would it reveal their true standings?
The ultimate goal is to determine if someone will be a powerful advocate for us, and ensure that our government will not infringe on our rights.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
17,068 Posts
My question would be “What is your interpretation of the meaning and intent of the Second Amendment?”
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,956 Posts
Mine would be " The 2nd Amendment guarantees the right of the people to keep and bear arms with no interference from state local or federal government. Shall not be infringed means not interfered with. No gun law passed to date has been effective or accomplished anything except to infringe on law abiding citizens rights while doing nothing to disarm criminals. Those are the facts. Now do you support across the board repeal of all Federal state and local gun control laws and return to abiding by the 2nd Amendment of U.S. Constitution?"""

Assuming I could get that said before security swarmed me and hauled me away.:ticking:
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
50,585 Posts
/\ /\ /\ /\ /\ /\ /\ /\ /\
While hooked up to the above..."Would you tell a lie to win an election? Will you do what you say you'd do, regardless of the gifts and pressures offered by your cohorts?"
 
  • Like
Reactions: msgt/ret

·
Registered
Joined
·
29 Posts
"What do you consider to be 'common sense' steps to avoid incidents such as the shooting at Sandy Hook, while still maintaining the rights affirmed in the 2nd Amendment?"
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,072 Posts
Will you vote FOR any gun control legislation?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
34,308 Posts
"Do you believe in the Constitution should be interpreted and applied as written?".
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
12,069 Posts
My question would be “What is your interpretation of the meaning and intent of the Second Amendment?”
I went to this *Meet Our Guy* event once a few years back just so I could ask that question. What I liked about this guy was when I asked him this question he didn't waver or dodge. He gave a clear concise answer that I found acceptable. The best part of his answer was it didn't take him but a few seconds to give his answer to me. Not the usual 3 to 5 minutes of senseless babble issueing forth from an incumbent that plays the game like his croney pals. He was a stand up guy in my book.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,029 Posts
.A response i got, from one of our Senators,is what i want to hear::As Americans, we have the right to defend ourselves, our families and our property, and the federal government should not interfere with this right.I received that a few months ago from Tim Scott(R)That said,action does speak louder than words.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
7,465 Posts
Until we have term limits and a more proficient means of recall, we will have politicians that say anything that they think that you want to hear in order to be elected/re-elected.

I'd like to see an employment contract where they are held to certain key commitments that they make. Void the promise, enforce the contract. No recall election, just "you're fired".

This sort of employment contract is nothing new to the private sector, but unheard of in the world of the professionally incompetent.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
36,326 Posts
"Discuss the Constitution and what it means to you, specifically addressing each of the BOR amendments, and specifically identifying what you will/won't do regarding each during your temporary representation." With none of this zippy sound-byte response crap allowed, no cutting off the questioner when the question isn't answered fully and while the questioner still has questions about those replies.

I, too, would like to see an iron-clad employment contract implemented for every single executive/legislative/judicial person hired, as well as an iron-clad (perhaps constitutional amendment) criminal standard created for material breach of oath of office (focusing on the protecting and defending the Constitution part, and the good faith part).

Agreed, that until we can recall/fire them at will, criminalize the crimes they commit, criminalize the oaths they break, and wipe clean the "gravy train" mentality we've got in all branches, we'll not get far.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,604 Posts
You do realize that criminals do not follow existing laws, right?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
36,326 Posts
You do realize that criminals do not follow existing laws, right?
Sure. Hence the heavy-handed approach with them, regarding term limits, criminality on material oath breaking, and all the rest. We can't trust them as far as we can kick them, mostly.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
6,200 Posts
So, if you were in a position where you were able to ask an election candidate one question, what would be the ultimate question that would trap them into revealing their true belief of what the Second Amendment means?...
"What, precisely, does 'shall not be infringed' mean?"
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
6,200 Posts
Until we have term limits and a more proficient means of recall, we will have politicians that say anything that they think that you want to hear in order to be elected/re-elected...
We already have term limits. They're called elections. It's the electorate's fault that the term limits have not been imposed where they're needed. The most dangerous politician of all is the one who doesn't have to worry about re-election. Ever hear the expression, "I'll have more 'flexibility' after the election?" :yup:

Besides, the only time people demand term limits is when they don't like the incumbent.

I'd like to see an employment contract where they are held to certain key commitments that they make. Void the promise, enforce the contract. No recall election, just "you're fired".
OK, so who is to judge whether the terms of the "contract" have been met? Do we appoint an all-powerful dictator to pick who gets "fired"? Ooops! I don't think we want that!

Maybe we should try the offending public servant in a court of law? Oh! We already have a mechanism for doing that - It's called impeachment. It's not done often enough, or for the right reasons, but the option is there.

Perhaps, instead, we task the electorate with making that judgement, either at re-election time, or via a recall. Hasn't always worked out all that well, but I've yet to see an alternative that would be any better.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,604 Posts
Sure. Hence the heavy-handed approach with them, regarding term limits, criminality on material oath breaking, and all the rest. We can't trust them as far as we can kick them, mostly.
Wasn't directed at you. This would be a question I'd ask a candidate, leading up to getting the point across that the current laws are a PITA for law abiding citizens and do nothing to stop criminals from getting guns.
 
1 - 20 of 25 Posts
Top