Sick Gun Grabbers want all gun owners insured

Steelplate said:
I know exactly the situation.... you're a cowering little wimp. Just another pearl clutcher that just KNOWS that the stormtroopers are going to be knocking at your door any second now to confiscate your guns. You listen to the unabashed corporate whores that are the right wing media and believe them when they tell you ...

"we're the only ones you can trust...every other source of information is a conspiracy to bring Communism here in the United States"....and you clutch your pearls in fear some more.

The funny thing is, you all have this sense of false bravado. But you're just scared of your own shadow. You guys are like high school bullies who never grew up, while everyone else around you has
Click to expand...

Nailed him!
 
Taichiliberal said:
Actually, you're intellectually impotent, because you keep trying to omit the first 4 words.

And if you don't understand the full ramifications of the ENTIRE amendment, President Washington and the boys sure as hell clarified things with the Militia Act of 1792. I would suggest you get an adult to read and explain it to you, because you do seem to have a problem comprehending English composition.
Click to expand...

532796_367591836693046_836650506_n.jpg


Actual quote in bold print.

Among the many interesting objects which will engage your attention that of providing for the common defense will merit particular regard. To be prepared for war is one of the most effectual means of preserving peace.

A free people ought not only to be armed, but disciplined; to which end a uniform and well-digested plan is requisite; and their safety and interest require that they should promote such manufactories as tend to render them independent of others

First Annual Message to Congress on the State of the Union
January 8, 1790
 
Steelplate said:
I know exactly the situation.... you're a cowering little wimp. Just another pearl clutcher that just KNOWS that the stormtroopers are going to be knocking at your door any second now to confiscate your guns. You listen to the unabashed corporate whores that are the right wing media and believe them when they tell you ...

"we're the only ones you can trust...every other source of information is a conspiracy to bring Communism here in the United States"....and you clutch your pearls in fear some more.

The funny thing is, you all have this sense of false bravado. But you're just scared of your own shadow. You guys are like high school bullies who never grew up, while everyone else around you has
Click to expand...

While you apparently have the ability to formulate a response; you evidently don't have the ability to address what was presented.

I reiterate:
"So if a specific number of the population want to reinstate slavery, it should be considered?"
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
532796_367591836693046_836650506_n.jpg


Actual quote in bold print.

Among the many interesting objects which will engage your attention that of providing for the common defense will merit particular regard. To be prepared for war is one of the most effectual means of preserving peace.

A free people ought not only to be armed, but disciplined; to which end a uniform and well-digested plan is requisite; and their safety and interest require that they should promote such manufactories as tend to render them independent of others

First Annual Message to Congress on the State of the Union
January 8, 1790
Click to expand...

As usual when you post shit like this, like you did Jefferson and others, I'm always able to easily debunk it.

Dumbfuck.

"A free people ought not only be armed and disciplined, but they should have sufficient arms and ammunition to maintain a status of independence from any who might attempt to abuse them, which would include their own government." http://tinyurl.com/cbt6gk5

This quote is partially accurate as the beginning section is taken from Washington's First Annual Message to Congress on the State of the Union. However, the quote is then manipulated into a differing context and the remaining text is innacurate. Here is the actual text from Washington's speech:

"A free people ought not only to be armed, but disciplined; to which end a uniform and well-digested plan is requisite; and their safety and interest require that they should promote such manufactories as tend to render them independent of others for essential, particularly military, supplies.
Click to expand...
 
Howey said:
As usual when you post shit like this, like you did Jefferson and others, I'm always able to easily debunk it.

Dumbfuck.
Click to expand...

OH-WOW, you really caught me!! DAMN :(

I put the real quote in bold print; but my cut and past left off the last few words.
"...for essential, particularly military, supplies..."

I sure am glad that I posted the link, so that you could use it to support your claim.

But then; what do you FEEL the last 5 words change in the gist of the statement?

By the way, your dad's facebook page is really interesting.
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
532796_367591836693046_836650506_n.jpg


Actual quote in bold print.

Among the many interesting objects which will engage your attention that of providing for the common defense will merit particular regard. To be prepared for war is one of the most effectual means of preserving peace.

A free people ought not only to be armed, but disciplined; to which end a uniform and well-digested plan is requisite; and their safety and interest require that they should promote such manufactories as tend to render them independent of others

First Annual Message to Congress on the State of the Union
January 8, 1790
Click to expand...

Thanks for helping me prove my point....because the Militia Act of 1792 clarifies what the Second Amendment is all about....and about a century later the Militia Act of 1903 gave us the National Guard.

Like I said, I don't think the current NRA jokers wailing about the Constitution and the current laws REALLY want to live by the letter of the law.
 
Taichiliberal said:
Thanks for helping me prove my point....because the Militia Act of 1792 clarifies what the Second Amendment is all about....and about a century later the Militia Act of 1903 gave us the National Guard.

Like I said, I don't think the current NRA jokers wailing about the Constitution and the current laws REALLY want to live by the letter of the law.
Click to expand...

Not really sure you FEEL you were able to read into what was posted; but I'm positive the chronology of the posts will show you to be in error.
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
Originally Posted by Taichiliberal
Thanks for helping me prove my point....because the Militia Act of 1792 clarifies what the Second Amendment is all about....and about a century later the Militia Act of 1903 gave us the National Guard.

Like I said, I don't think the current NRA jokers wailing about the Constitution and the current laws REALLY want to live by the letter of the law.
Click to expand...
Not really sure you FEEL you were able to read into what was posted; but I'm positive the chronology of the posts will show you to be in error.
Click to expand...

Actually the chronology of the posts shows YOU are displaying an ignorance of the Militia Act of 1792.....I suggest you read it carefully and comprehensively, because your highlighted quote alludes to EXACTLY what later came into law.

As it stands, most gunners wailing about the 2nd Amendment think that it gives the INDIVIDUAL a right to own a gun nearly UNREGULATED by state or local gov't.......but the chronology CLEARLY DEMONSTRATES that this ownership only occurs UNDER THE REGULATION of military law...in this case being a "militia". Gunners just ignore the first few words of the 2nd Amemdment, and then operate on the premise that, "it doesn't state that we can't own a gun".
 
Taichiliberal said:
Gunners just ignore the first few words of the 2nd Amemdment, and then operate on the premise that, "it doesn't state that we can't own a gun".
Click to expand...

That, in a nutshell, is the right wing meme.

Whereas they like to think their views are black and white, their actions are a gray cloud of obfuscation.
 
Howey said:
That, in a nutshell, is the right wing meme.

Whereas they like to think their views are black and white, their actions are a gray cloud of obfuscation.
Click to expand...
If we were to pass a gun registration Law, would you support that there would be another actual Law passed that declared that no new gun laws could be passed from that point on? In other words, the Registration law would be the final gun law ever passed. That may be the only way that there will be any "moore" gun laws passed, the gun grabbers would have to capitulate, cave, and just give in to US.
 
Taichiliberal said:
Actually the chronology of the posts shows YOU are displaying an ignorance of the Militia Act of 1792.....I suggest you read it carefully and comprehensively, because your highlighted quote alludes to EXACTLY what later came into law.

As it stands, most gunners wailing about the 2nd Amendment think that it gives the INDIVIDUAL a right to own a gun nearly UNREGULATED by state or local gov't.......but the chronology CLEARLY DEMONSTRATES that this ownership only occurs UNDER THE REGULATION of military law...in this case being a "militia". Gunners just ignore the first few words of the 2nd Amemdment, and then operate on the premise that, "it doesn't state that we can't own a gun".
Click to expand...

I can see that you're stuck in obtuse mode and have just decided to continue hoping that someone will believe your stupidity.
You go right ahead and keep baying at the moon; but the chronology of the posts and history, will show that not only are you in error, but that you intend to remain a moon bat.
Please continue; because at least your amusing.
 
SJJRSJJS said:
Originally Posted by Howey
That, in a nutshell, is the right wing meme.
Click to expand...

Whereas they like to think their views are black and white, their actions are a gray cloud of obfuscation.

If we were to pass a gun registration Law, would you support that there would be another actual Law passed that declared that no new gun laws could be passed from that point on? In other words, the Registration law would be the final gun law ever passed. That may be the only way that there will be any "moore" gun laws passed, the gun grabbers would have to capitulate, cave, and just give in to US.
Click to expand...

Once again you keep trying to pass of NRA paranoia, supposition and conjecture as fact. For the last 30 years or so, the NRA and it's parrot along with the weapons manufacturers pundits have been wailing propaganda of a nefarious plot to "grab" guns from Americans as a prelude to some sort of communist takeover. This was to be facilitated by UN troops using a hit list of registered gun owners.....the EXACT details as to how this would be done have always been murky at best.

Well, in my lifetime NO legislation has ever been proposed in Congress or the Senate to confiscate legally owned weapons from law abiding citizens. That is NOT gun control. Gun control is NOT having any yahoo roaming the streets with a concealed weapon, much less crossing any state border with said weapon. Gun control is NOT having any schmuck with a driver's license and cash buy any type of weapon they want with no questions asked.

To date, you've provided NOTHING that validates your use of the term "gun grabbers" in your subject title. And again, I ask what is it about a background check that scares you so much? Scared you might not pass?
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
Originally Posted by Taichiliberal
Actually the chronology of the posts shows YOU are displaying an ignorance of the Militia Act of 1792.....I suggest you read it carefully and comprehensively, because your highlighted quote alludes to EXACTLY what later came into law.

As it stands, most gunners wailing about the 2nd Amendment think that it gives the INDIVIDUAL a right to own a gun nearly UNREGULATED by state or local gov't.......but the chronology CLEARLY DEMONSTRATES that this ownership only occurs UNDER THE REGULATION of military law...in this case being a "militia". Gunners just ignore the first few words of the 2nd Amemdment, and then operate on the premise that, "it doesn't state that we can't own a gun".
Click to expand...

I can see that you're stuck in obtuse mode and have just decided to continue hoping that someone will believe your stupidity.
You go right ahead and keep baying at the moon; but the chronology of the posts and history, will show that not only are you in error, but that you intend to remain a moon bat.
Please continue; because at least your amusing.
Click to expand...


And as always, when properly challenged with facts, USFreedom911 just bluffs and blusters and then runs away. It's willfully ignorant and intellectual cowards like USFreedom911 who bray the loudest about subjects they only have a slight knowledge of.

Bottom line: USFreedom911 and his ilk CANNOT provide ANY proposal by Congress that would "grab" guns from law abiding, legal gun owning citizens. Nor can the forementioned folk provide any evidence that counters how the Militia Act of 1792 disproves the notion that any citizen has the "right" to a weapon OUTSIDE OF MILITARY/GOV'T SUPERVISION (i.e., a well regulated militia). Nor can the forementioned folk provide any evidence that counters how the Militia Act of 1903 replaces "militia" with the National Guard.

And to date neither the author of this thread nor USFreedom911 can provide a rational, logical or fact based reason as to why they are so scared of a simple background check to own a gun? Instead, we'll get the usual BS responses and attempts to change the subject by creating any scenario that will placate their wishful thinking. And the beat goes on.
 
taichi, still a moron. It is the height of stupidity to believe that the founders would write ANYTHING allowing the new federal government to control firearms after dealing with an oppressive central government that tried to take their firearms. anyone believing such stupidity needs to crawl back in their mothers basement.
 
Taichiliberal said:
And as always, when properly challenged with facts, USFreedom911 just bluffs and blusters and then runs away. It's willfully ignorant and intellectual cowards like USFreedom911 who bray the loudest about subjects they only have a slight knowledge of.

Bottom line: USFreedom911 and his ilk CANNOT provide ANY proposal by Congress that would "grab" guns from law abiding, legal gun owning citizens. Nor can the forementioned folk provide any evidence that counters how the Militia Act of 1792 disproves the notion that any citizen has the "right" to a weapon OUTSIDE OF MILITARY/GOV'T SUPERVISION (i.e., a well regulated militia). Nor can the forementioned folk provide any evidence that counters how the Militia Act of 1903 replaces "militia" with the National Guard.

And to date neither the author of this thread nor USFreedom911 can provide a rational, logical or fact based reason as to why they are so scared of a simple background check to own a gun? Instead, we'll get the usual BS responses and attempts to change the subject by creating any scenario that will placate their wishful thinking. And the beat goes on.
Click to expand...

The only one that appears to be blustering, is you; because the chronology of the posts will show that you're the one that keeps braying about being right, when you are so obviously in error.

I know that you have a problem accepting defeat; but by this time you should be use to it. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top