TexasCHLforum.com

When a Senator or a Representative of the House in Congress votes for Gun Control or supports Gun Control they are violating their Oath of Office to support and defend the Constitution of the United States of America. The 2nd Amendment is part of that Constitution and I would like to know if they can read and write and have the mental ability to understand what "SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED" means? Anyone that does this should be IMPEACHED and removed from Office. If enough people complained, hollored, squealed, bitched and protested this maybe we could get their attention, but it seems like no one but me realizes this or ever says anything about it. Let's hear from the Peanut Gallary.

fpetri wrote: ↑Tue Oct 01, 2019 12:27 am When a Senator or a Representative of the House in Congress votes for Gun Control or supports Gun Control they are violating their Oath of Office to support and defend the Constitution of the United States of America. The 2nd Amendment is part of that Constitution and I would like to know if they can read and write and have the mental ability to understand what "SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED" means? Anyone that does this should be IMPEACHED and removed from Office. If enough people complained, hollored, squealed, bitched and protested this maybe we could get their attention, but it seems like no one but me realizes this or ever says anything about it. Let's hear from the Peanut Gallary.

I agree with you, something must be done if the 2a is threated in any way shape or form!

narcissist wrote: ↑Tue Oct 01, 2019 12:34 am

fpetri wrote: ↑Tue Oct 01, 2019 12:27 am When a Senator or a Representative of the House in Congress votes for Gun Control or supports Gun Control they are violating their Oath of Office to support and defend the Constitution of the United States of America. The 2nd Amendment is part of that Constitution and I would like to know if they can read and write and have the mental ability to understand what "SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED" means? Anyone that does this should be IMPEACHED and removed from Office. If enough people complained, hollored, squealed, bitched and protested this maybe we could get their attention, but it seems like no one but me realizes this or ever says anything about it. Let's hear from the Peanut Gallary.

I agree with you, something must be done if the 2a is threated in any way shape or form!

Yea, a short rope and a long drop with a jerk at the end.

fpetri wrote: ↑Tue Oct 01, 2019 12:27 am When a Senator or a Representative of the House in Congress votes for Gun Control or supports Gun Control they are violating their Oath of Office to support and defend the Constitution of the United States of America. The 2nd Amendment is part of that Constitution and I would like to know if they can read and write and have the mental ability to understand what "SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED" means? Anyone that does this should be IMPEACHED and removed from Office. If enough people complained, hollored, squealed, bitched and protested this maybe we could get their attention, but it seems like no one but me realizes this or ever says anything about it. Let's hear from the Peanut Gallary.

If you think you are the only one then this must be your first foray into the world of politics. I don't think this is your Peanut Gallery. This forum and many, many of it's members have been active in the defense of the Constitution. This is an odd first post but welcome to the forum. Read and learn and then you can direct you passion with those who have been active for a long time. BTW, what have you done?

You are preaching to the choir, not the peanut gallery.

You are preaching to the choir, not the peanut gallery.

Interesting note about being in a choir... the most beautiful sounds can only be made when the choir members can each hear one another. When one or more members raises their voice above all others to the point that they can't, or won't, hear everyone else, beautiful music degenerates toward raucous noise. I think parallels can sometimes be made in other areas, such as advocacy.

Middle Age Russ wrote: ↑Tue Oct 01, 2019 8:42 am

You are preaching to the choir, not the peanut gallery.

Interesting note about being in a choir... the most beautiful sounds can only be made when the choir members can each hear one another. When one or more members raises their voice above all others to the point that they can't, or won't, hear everyone else, beautiful music degenerates toward raucous noise. I think parallels can sometimes be made in other areas, such as advocacy.

Your choir analogy fails in multiple ways when applied to the original post.

People in the choir know there are other choir members singing and choir members don't falsely and publicly call out other members for not singing. Also, most choirs do not appreciate the know-it-all that shows up out of no where and starts lecturing the other choir members.

I could go on but the fallacies should obvious to most.

First post to the forum!

Careful everyone. Might be a ...

So, no telling where this is going or coming from.

C-dub wrote: ↑Tue Oct 01, 2019 12:14 pm First post to the forum!

Careful everyone. Might be a ...

So, no telling where this is going or coming from.

You are not the only person who thought that. First post, and yet created an account over a year and a half ago.

Trying to look at this objectively. The Constitution included a mechanism for changing it. Heck, even the 2nd Amendment is a result of that built in change process (although that wasn't so much a change as a clarification).

Regardless, I don't think we can say that people are violating their oath to "support and defend" the Constitution when they try to change it. If we go down that path, then every single amendment would have resulted from folks violating their oaths. Since the change process is part of the document, then advocating for an Amendment would actually be supporting the Constitution, IMHO.

Now if someone was to instead try and pass a clearly unconstitutional law, while bypassing the Amendment process, then I think we'd be alot closer to a violation of their oath. And doing something that is clearly unconstitutional by executive order or regulation is another huge step in that direction (bump stock ban, anyone).

People in the choir know there are other choir members singing and choir members don't falsely and publicly call out other members for not singing. Also, most choirs do not appreciate the know-it-all that shows up out of no where and starts lecturing the other choir members.

I agree with these points you make, just as I was agreeing with your other post though I may not have stated it well. People -- even choir members -- being prone to vices and failures, I still see value in the analogy, though, as it pertains to the tone-deafness that often accompanies regarding our own thoughts (self) too highly without regard for others'. The OP, whether intentionally or not, came across to me as someone pleased with his own self-righteousness. I hope this was unintentional, but time will usually tell...

Middle Age Russ wrote: ↑Tue Oct 01, 2019 9:09 pm

People in the choir know there are other choir members singing and choir members don't falsely and publicly call out other members for not singing. Also, most choirs do not appreciate the know-it-all that shows up out of no where and starts lecturing the other choir members.

I agree with these points you make, just as I was agreeing with your other post though I may not have stated it well. People -- even choir members -- being prone to vices and failures, I still see value in the analogy, though, as it pertains to the tone-deafness that often accompanies regarding our own thoughts (self) too highly without regard for others'. The OP, whether intentionally or not, came across to me as someone pleased with his own self-righteousness. I hope this was unintentional, but time will usually tell...

I think I see your point now.

This gotta be a record for the world's brightest Glow Post. Yall have fun with that...

PriestTheRunner wrote: ↑Tue Oct 01, 2019 11:00 pm This gotta be a record for the world's brightest Glow Post. Yall have fun with that...

So, for the sake of the argument, let us go with the OP being a "glowpost". What would the possible agent have to gain on THIS particular forum by posting that? It should be obvious to anyone who bothers to read many of the posts here that a large number of the members are very strong supporters of the Second Amendment, and the RKBA. However, it should also be obvious that this forum also doesn't allow people to post encouragement for law-breaking, especially felonious actions, and IIRC, that is one of Mr. Cotton's rules about posting on here. So, either the possible agent is a "newbie" who hasn't done their research, OR is engaging in some serious wishful thinking.

K.Mooneyham wrote: ↑Wed Oct 02, 2019 1:32 am

PriestTheRunner wrote: ↑Tue Oct 01, 2019 11:00 pm This gotta be a record for the world's brightest Glow Post. Yall have fun with that...

So, for the sake of the argument, let us go with the OP being a "glowpost". What would the possible agent have to gain on THIS particular forum by posting that? It should be obvious to anyone who bothers to read many of the posts here that a large number of the members are very strong supporters of the Second Amendment, and the RKBA. However, it should also be obvious that this forum also doesn't allow people to post encouragement for law-breaking, especially felonious actions, and IIRC, that is one of Mr. Cotton's rules about posting on here. So, either the possible agent is a "newbie" who hasn't done their research, OR is engaging in some serious wishful thinking.

Honestly, most of my basis is on that last line "lets hear from the peanut gallery". That is a tone of disdain. If it were a long-time lurker, then I highly doubt that they would be so condescending. That is the tone of someone outside looking in, especially stated on a first post and then disappearing.

What is probably more like is MISO out of Bragg or a reporter looking for something. We know reporters follow this forum as we have been directly quoted in multiple articles in the past. Psychops is an option because they might be taking a litmus test using known sources of info that are systematically tracked. Either way, not a 'normal' post on here.