And thats a good reason to have and carry a gun...PROTECT YOURSELF
Cops have no constitutional duty to protect you
- Thread starter LV426
- Start date
And thats a good reason to have and carry a gun...PROTECT YOURSELF
Get a gun u can shoot the intruder...PROTECT YOURSELF
Because cops dont have to!
If u dont have a gun...u can beg throw a toaster or WAIT on cops
Matt Dillon
Retardium User
Who may or may not do something for you.
It's not smart to take that gamble. I'll tell you that.
If you're really poor, a sharp machete can do quite a bit.
Matt Dillon
Retardium User
They churned out quasi-fucking-State-Babies for 2 generations. What could go wrong?
I know you've never seen a State Baby; They keep them locked under the jails lest they get loose and rape and murder.
Apathetic, no-respect-for-the-elders, no-critical-thinking-skills idiots.
The bottom line is loving families make good productive members of society; The government creates monsters that cannot integrate into society ever.
Having more government in charge of education is a very bad concept. Their track record is terribad.
Last edited:
evince
Truthmatters
They churned out quasi-fucking-State-Babies for 2 generations. What could go wrong?
I know you've never seen a State Baby; They keep them locked under the jails lest they get loose and rape and murder.
Apathetic, no-respect-for-the-elders, no-critical-thinking-skills idiots.
The bottom line is loving families make good productive members of society; The government creates monsters that cannot integrate into society ever.
Having more government in charge of education is a very bad concept. Their track record is terribad.
Your brain melted
This is all Q type racist fantasy shit brick
evince
Truthmatters
If the intruder is IN YOUR HOUSE!
That has nothing to do with the duty police do not have to protect you.
Voting 3P is the same as voting for Trump because the outcomes are the same.
But you said you've hated the last 100 years of government, before you were even born.
So why not stay on the subject?
You said you hate the government because of the last 100 years, which includes the Civil Rights Act, which you are now also saying is illegitimate because it came from a government you haven't considered legitimate for a century.
So that means you hate the Civil Rights Act, which advances pluralistic, multi-racial democracy.
So why are YOU deflecting?
It's becoming crystal clear that you have no idea what "projection" and "deflection" mean because you have been employing both tactics on this thread.
And no, I opposed the Patriot Act. I marched against it. I voted against it by voting against the people who supported it.
You, however, claim you have guns because of things like the Patriot Act, but then you haven't used your guns to do anything about it this whole time.
So the guns you say you have to protect against government overreach have never once been used to protect from government overreach like the Patriot Act.
So what fucking good are your guns, then?
Well you accidentally did when you said that there's potential fraud in mail voting.
Just to be clear, there isn't potential fraud in mail-voting, and more people were convicted of in-person voter fraud than mail fraud.
Thanks, but I'm not really into taking career advice from someone who never achieved anything more than mediocrity with their meaningless and pathetic life.
Dutch Uncle
* Tertia Optio * Defend the Constitution
LOL So where do you think you'll be in 10 years? Same spot, but fatter?
Ummmm...that report is a cover-up, Dutch.
LMAO!
Why do you instantly believe everything the cops tell you?
But you did reveal that when you let is slip that you said mail voting was fraudulent.
Dutch Uncle
* Tertia Optio * Defend the Constitution
This is not a current event, faggot. It's from 17 years ago.
"June 28, 2005"
"The decision, with an opinion by Justice Antonin Scalia and dissents from Justices John Paul Stevens and Ruth Bader Ginsburg, overturned a ruling by a federal appeals court in Colorado. "
W. was president and it was pre-crash crazy house prices and mortgage times.
It applies to Uvalde, making it part of the discussion of current events.
Did you happen to read the conclusion from the LV shooting report? Because the conclusion was inconclusive as to why he did it.
Isn't the job of investigators to find out why it happened? The conclusion in the report you linked to offers no explanation.
So it's not a concluded investigation because they never determined the motive.
OR
They did determine the motive, but kept it out of the report because of the implications.
Hard to believe that no one could figure out why this normal white guy shot up a concert.
In order for the investigation to be done, the Uvalde police would need to cooperate with the investigators, and all news and indications as of now is that they aren't.