The definitive gun rights thread

using your finger to tell someone you hate how you feel about them is the same as making a slashing motion across your throat


its a death thread



remember how you guys claim all a gun nut has to do is FEEL threatened and they can kill people
 
gfm7175 said:
Oh wow... You "punished" him?!?!?! Good for you. In actuality, you are only punishing yourself. He can still reply to your posts all the same, but you can't reply to his anymore... You are banning yourself from being able to do that. Good ol' liberal "logic" I suppose... ;)
Click to expand...

There are certain posters I find so boring that conversations between us bore others too. Except with the Earl of Havana (and occasionally Pigdog), putting them on ignore tends to bring an end to this boredom.
 
Penderyn said:
There are certain posters I find so boring that conversations between us bore others too. Except with the Earl of Havana (and occasionally Pigdog), putting them on ignore tends to bring an end to this boredom.
Click to expand...

Meh. What's "boring" is what you are going to leave yourself with...

ECHO...ECHO...ECHO...ECHO...ECHO...ECHO...ECHO
 
Micawber said:
The amendment was promulgated by anti federalists worried that a strong federal military would take over the 13 colonies.
The need to maintain a well regulated militia is the legislative intent. For two hundred years nobody even invoked the law.
The NRA committed a fraud on the people and supplanted its will in the Court in Heller. Every prior decision was contrary
and consistent with the 2nd amendment.

There was no organic individual and unfettered right to own guns from the 2nd amendment. No state with a state militia has ever called up
its militia to fight the federal government. The construction accepted by the majority
in Heller is wrongly decided, a repayment made by unscrupulous justices and a history ignoring creation, a total victory of gun manufacturers.
Because of it the United States has been drenched in a blood bath.
Click to expand...

There's nothing definitive about your thread. It's another example of a gun hater than wants guns bans but doesn't have the guts to try and take them himself.

Don't like guns, don't buy one. Don't like that I exercise my 2nd amendment rights to own them, get off your ass, be a man, and fail in your efforts to personally try and take them.
 
Micawber said:
The amendment was promulgated by anti federalists worried that a strong federal military would take over the 13 colonies.
The need to maintain a well regulated militia is the legislative intent. For two hundred years nobody even invoked the law.
The NRA committed a fraud on the people and supplanted its will in the Court in Heller. Every prior decision was contrary
and consistent with the 2nd amendment.

There was no organic individual and unfettered right to own guns from the 2nd amendment. No state with a state militia has ever called up
its militia to fight the federal government. The construction accepted by the majority
in Heller is wrongly decided, a repayment made by unscrupulous justices and a history ignoring creation, a total victory of gun manufacturers.
Because of it the United States has been drenched in a blood bath.
Click to expand...

Now that we have seen the bullshit, lets get to the FACTS:

“A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed.”​
​


What is a well regulated militia? What were the Framers talking about really? Of all the fears of the Founding Fathers, none was stronger than their fear of standing armies.

As constitutional scholar David Young has observed: “The necessity of an armed populace, protection against disarming of the citizenry, and the need to guard against a select militia and assure a real militia which could defend liberty against any standing forces the government might raise were topics interspersed throughout the ratification period.”

This may be a very foreign concept, but the first fight over the Second Amendment wasn’t over whether the population should be armed. All the Framers agreed with that. The fight was between federalists and anti-federalists over whether we would have a standing army.

The Anti-Federalists―among them George Mason, Patrick Henry and Samuel Adams―were militant advocates of the inclusion of a bill of rights in the Constitution because they did not trust the power of the federal government to be restrained.

Don Kates, a scholar of the constitution and Second Amendment, points out that, “During the ratification debate, the Federalists vehemently denied that the federal government would have the power to infringe freedom of expression, religion, and other basic rights—expressly including the right to arms. In this context, Madison secured ratification by his commitment to support and to safeguard the fundamental rights that all agreed should never be infringed.”

In short, the Federalists—including men like John Jay, James Madison and George Washington—wanted the Second Amendment because they believed a strong federal government would be able to control a standing army.

And the Anti-Federalists wanted it because it would mean every able-bodied man in America would be armed in the event that the federal government or America’s own standing army turned on its own people.

https://ivn.us/2015/11/03/reality-check-the-true-purpose-of-the-second-amendment/
 
Penderyn said:
Well, a lot of them were slave-owning racists, .....................
giphy.gif
Click to expand...

STFU you blathering Marxist moron. :rolleyes:
 
Penderyn said:
Killing people protects nobody - it just kills people. Most people get rid of the bang-bangs and have laws.
Click to expand...

You dumb Marxist twat; more people have been murdered by their own Governments than any wars or criminals. I do wish you were as smart as you foolishly think you are. :rolleyes:
 
archives said:
Those supposed quotes are largely cherry picked phrases employed to defend whatever point of view the editor is pushing, regardless of the Founding Father, if you read enough, you can find and frame a quote to support just about anything
Click to expand...

LIE and LAME; see my post above Arsecheese and stop promulgating the Marxist rhetoric you are fed by MSNBC. :rolleyes:
 
evince said:
using your finger to tell someone you hate how you feel about them is the same as making a slashing motion across your throat


its a death thread



remember how you guys claim all a gun nut has to do is FEEL threatened and they can kill people
Click to expand...

RB 60 was responding to a video that I posted. It was by a lawyer who was explaining a Pennsylvania case that went all the way to the Supreme Court. There was a long-running dispute between neighbors. There was a restraining order against the neighbor. She was shouting at him and came onto the guy's property. Technically, he might have gotten away with actually shooting her. Instead, he made that gesture. Another neighbor claimed that she felt threatened and called the police.

As a result, "finger-shooter" was fined $100, plus costs.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top