The felons from Jan 6 should never legally carry a gun again.

Big Money Dolla said:
Then do it. you haven't. You call me lazy yet I have provided numerous sources for my position, you just spew shit from your mouth.
Click to expand...

You provided 2 sources, both of which you copied from word-for-word.

So you didn't think for yourself.


I'm done with you.
Click to expand...

LOL. Too late. You were already done here:

LV426 said:
Big Money Dolla said:
It is the historical meaning of the word not an interpretation
Click to expand...

You literally said it was an interpretation IN THE SAME FUCKING POST:

it's not reasons interpretation, it's constitutional scholar's interpretations
Click to expand...

You're done.
Click to expand...
 
LV426 said:
You provided 2 sources, both of which you copied from word-for-word.

So you didn't think for yourself.




LOL. Too late. You were already done here:
Click to expand...





200w.gif
 
Dutch Uncle said:
Is that how you made your money instead of serving our nation and swearing an oath our Constitution?
Click to expand...

Wouldn't you like to know?

I don't need to invoke any personal circumstances to make a point, nor do I need to lean on it as a crutch in an argument to make myself feel better for taking things so personally.
 
LV426 said:
Wouldn't you like to know?

I don't need to invoke any personal circumstances to make a point, nor do I need to lean on it as a crutch in an argument to make myself feel better for taking things so personally.
Click to expand...

Your posts indicate you did.

Why not? You invoke them when it pleases you.
 
LV426 said:
Right, and the last tax law made by Congress was the Tax Cut and Jobs Act that went into effect on 1/2/18 and the result was a $1T federal deficit, the first one in almost 10 years. I voted for absolutely no one who voted for that bill.

So Obama raised taxes, cut the deficit by 2/3, then Trump came in, cut taxes, and the deficit went back to $1T.
Click to expand...

Deficits happen because the government spends too much, not because of tax cuts.
 
Into the Night said:
Deficits happen because the government spends too much, not because of tax cuts.
Click to expand...

No, deficits happen THIS CENTURY because the government cuts its own revenue.

Government spending isn't why we went from a $236B surplus in 2000 to a $157B deficit by 2002, followed by 4 record deficits in 6 years.

Tax cuts are why that happened.
 
Dutch Uncle said:
Your posts indicate you did.
Why not? You invoke them when it pleases you.
Click to expand...

What personal circumstances did I invoke that you think I did only when it pleases me?

In case you forgot, you and others have been trying to drag personal details out of me all year long, and have failed every single time.

There are two reasons why I don't invoke my personal given circumstances here:

1. It would be way too unfair to you.

2. I don't need to do that in order to make an argument.
 
SmarterthanYou said:
I've spent over a decade dealing with gun laws, government action against gun crime, etc. and i've never seen a single case where the gov WAITED to file gun charges............

so no, you were lied to by the FBI, deal with it.
Click to expand...

There are many things the people and the government realizes are dangerous if used as a weapons to the public. You must already know that the Government's main role in the world is to keep it's citizens safe- and every peace loving country in the world has this goal.

That is why certain things are either banned, regulated, and/or licensed! Certain fertilizers, toxins, poisons, chemicals, explosives, and even certain guns and other extreme weapons.

The people will always expect that their taxes are spent to keep them safe from these thngs falling into the wrong hands.

I am sure you understand! If you are unable to contemplate this- YOU MAY HAVE TO FIND SOMEONE ELSE TO ARGUE YOUR PERSONAL DISSATISFACTION IN THIS.

Because this is a given that you should already know- and I refuse to even argue about it with anyone!
 
LV426 said:
What personal circumstances did I invoke that you think I did only when it pleases me?

In case you forgot, you and others have been trying to drag personal details out of me all year long, and have failed every single time.

There are two reasons why I don't invoke my personal given circumstances here:

1. It would be way too unfair to you.

2. I don't need to do that in order to make an argument.
Click to expand...

Wow. It always fascinates me when a single post of mine results in two responses from the same person. :)

The fact you use a person's personal details against them as you please while being secretive about your own is what tells me you are afraid, have something to hide and, basically, are a dishonest person.
 
Dutch Uncle said:
Wow. It always fascinates me when a single post of mine results in two responses from the same person.
Click to expand...

The bar for what fascinates you is so low, it's lying on the floor.

This isn't the own you think it is.


The fact you use a person's personal details against them as you please while being secretive about your own is what tells me you are afraid, have something to hide and, basically, are a dishonest person.
Click to expand...

I only use someone's personal details against them when they invoke them in a debate as a crutch to make up for the factual deficit that exists in their argument.

At that point, it's fair game; you wanted to throw that shit into the debate, well now it's going to be scrutinized just like it would if it was a hyperlink to an article or Op-Ed.

You want to submit personal anecdotes as evidence to support your argument, then be prepared for those anecdotes to be subject to the same level of scrutiny I would apply to any article or blog.

And expect me to bring those anecdotes back up regularly to keep you honest...BMD fucked around and found that out the hard way.

Now, if you think that is unfair, you can whine, but as my generation famously says:

fec32d9cb51f8478e4056d5529531680.gif
 
LV426 said:
The bar for what fascinates you is so low, it's lying on the floor.

This isn't the own you think it is.

I only use someone's personal details against them when they invoke them in a debate as a crutch to make up for the factual deficit that exists in their argument....
Click to expand...
Why do you care about what makes me happy? Why do you insist on forcing others to do as you deem best? What gives you the right to dictate?

Not sure what you mean with "own".

Who decides if a person's history or a crutch?
 
Dutch Uncle said:
Why do you care about what makes me happy
Click to expand...

I don't.


Dutch Uncle said:
Why do you insist on forcing others to do as you deem best? What gives you the right to dictate?
Click to expand...

What are you even talking about here? Use your words.


Who decides if a person's history or a crutch?
Click to expand...

Do you mean IS a crutch?

Well, simple...the fact that they invoked it instead of something factual or empirical. That's a pretty good indication that they're leaning on anecdotes instead of facts to carry their argument.

I don't understand what your problem is...I hold anecdotes to the same scrutiny I would hold an article, Op-Ed, or blog post.

WHY DON'T YOU? Because you trust what anonymous people tell you about themselves? Are you sure you're not a sucker?
 
LV426 said:
I don't.

What are you even talking about here? Use your words.

Do you mean IS a crutch?

Well, simple...the fact that they invoked it instead of something factual or empirical. That's a pretty good indication that they're leaning on anecdotes instead of facts to carry their argument.

I don't understand what your problem is...I hold anecdotes to the same scrutiny I would hold an article, Op-Ed, or blog post.

WHY DON'T YOU? Because you trust what anonymous people tell you about themselves? Are you sure you're not a sucker?
Click to expand...

Translation: I got nuthin'. I've been bullshitting all of you the entire fucking time.


I noticed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top