DId the Maine shooter have the right to bear an AR-15?

So ban trucks, cars, and airplanes. What about household chemicals and fertilizer?

There are serious and significant restrictions and limitations on trucks, cars and airplanes. Household chemicals are restricted and since Oklahoma City, we have serious limits and restrictions on fertilizer.
 
No. :nono:

We need to limit crazy homicidal peoples' access to society and weapons, fucktard.

And we did here in this country for a long, long time, until Big Pharma bribed our government to stop that, now they wander the streets looking for victims.

Ok, Id be happy with that, until the Republicans are willing to refund that effort, we need to limiti the weapons.
 
That's against the 2nd amendment. You don't like The Constitution, huh?

Good thing your dictatorial faggot ass is not in charge of a damn thing. :awesome:

I do not believe the Amendments are absolute. I am in charge of a few things.
 
Yep, the 9/11 hijackers fell thru the cracks.

After 9-11 we locked cockpits and created an entire branch of government dedicated in part to limiting access to airplanes. It seems to have worked thus far.
 
There are serious and significant restrictions and limitations on trucks, cars and airplanes. Household chemicals are restricted and since Oklahoma City, we have serious limits and restrictions on fertilizer.

Nothing that can't be very easily circumvented. I'm not going to get into the dangerous shit you can make by combining household chemicals.

So when will you start confiscating all the illegal guns owned by criminals? Those laws are already in place. :dunno:

But you want to go after the ar15 which is used in about 1% of firearm deaths. Because the victims are usually white. :palm:
 
No. :nono:

We need to limit crazy homicidal peoples' access to society and weapons, fucktard.

And we did here in this country for a long, long time, until Big Pharma bribed our government to stop that in the 1980s, now they wander the streets looking for victims.

Big Pharma made billions, their promises were false, and society has degraded by a significant percentage because of that happening.

What president signed the bill in the 1980's that ended funding to house the mentally ill? What party was in charge back then?
 
Nothing that can't be very easily circumvented. I'm not going to get into the dangerous shit you make by combining household chemicals.

So when will you start confiscating all the illegal guns owned by criminals? Those laws are already in place. :dunno:

How many elementary kids are being murdered with household chemicals? If it started happening, dam right we would regulate them.
 
So where does the Constitution say that the right is limited to those weapons a standing army would use against the populace? Do you not believe that giving widespread access to ICBM's would likely be the end of humanity?

you will not square an argument in attempts to get a 'gotcha' moment. you will not get me to admit that the people shouldn't have nukes, but if you believe that the government would use nukes against us, then we most definitely need nukes.

this is a common sense argument you want to avoid.........i understand. you're focused on proving that there can be limits, but the government does not have power to implement those limits because the government is limited by the constitution, not the people.
 
What president signed the bill in the 1980's that ended funding to house the mentally ill? What party was in charge back then?

What president emptied the asylums in 1963 with the CMHA? ... it was a democrat.
 
you will not square an argument in attempts to get a 'gotcha' moment. you will not get me to admit that the people shouldn't have nukes, but if you believe that the government would use nukes against us, then we most definitely need nukes.

this is a common sense argument you want to avoid.........i understand. you're focused on proving that there can be limits, but the government does not have power to implement those limits because the government is limited by the constitution, not the people.

It is a common sense argument that nukes should be limited. Your ideology would end humanity. If homicidal maniacs were given access to nukes, like they are these rifles, it would be over.
 
I believe when rights conflict, we are required to impose regulations to try to prevent the conflict. In this case, the right to liberty (freedom from being murdered at elementary school for example) is directly conflicting with the right of mentally ill people's right to bear arms.

Eat a dick, Nazi wannabe.

Ok, Id be happy with that, until the Republicans are willing to refund that effort, we need to limiti the weapons.

No, you're a fucktard. The government fails, so we need our weapons, dumbass. That is if you're for the survival of Americans.

I do not believe the Amendments are absolute. I am in charge of a few things.

I bet you don't, wannabe Nazi.

What president signed the bill in the 1980's that ended funding to house the mentally ill? What party was in charge back then?

The Uniparty, which you support, whether you realize it or not, lemming. What Senators and House Reps sponsored that bill and voted for it, hmm?

I wonder if Joe Biden is on the list?

https://www.congress.gov/bill/97th-congress/house-bill/3982

Possibly before Joe Biden's time, but it was sponsored by a Democrat, faggot.

Oh! But he's in there!

"07/14/1981 Senate Senate appointed conferee Domenici; Armstrong; Kassebaum; Boschwitz; Hollings; Chiles; Biden from the Committee on the Budget."

So yes, Joe Biden IS on that list of those who voted to close Mental Hospitals, dickwad.
 
Last edited:
How many elementary kids are being murdered with household chemicals? If it started happening, dam right we would regulate them.

No, you are NOT going to regulate them.

How many elementary school kids were killed in Chicago this year with handguns. How many were accidentally poisoned?
 
The Uniparty, which you support whether you realize it or not, lemming.

Oh, Excuse me, I thought it was the Republican House, Republican Senate and the Republican president trying to cut costs so they could justify cutting taxes for billionaires.
 
No, you are NOT going to regulate them.

How many elementary school kids were killed in Chicago this year with handguns. How many were accidentally poisoned?

I do not know. I know if the vast majority of those handguns were not sold to anyone with transportation to Gary Indiana, it would be less.
 
No, you are NOT going to regulate them.

How many elementary school kids were killed in Chicago this year with handguns. How many were accidentally poisoned?

I am going to try to regulate them, we are clearly heading that way. We had them banned in the past, and it saved lives.
 
Eat a dick, Nazi wannabe.



No, you're a fucktard. The government fails, so we need our weapons, dumbass. That is if you're for the survival of Americans.



I bet you don't, wannabe Nazi.



The Uniparty, which you support, whether you realize it or not, lemming. What Senators and House Reps sponsored that bill and voted for it, hmm?

I wonder if Joe Biden is on the list?

You do not believe rights are absolute either.

Big armchair warrior can spell Natzi.... im impressed. You are a huge fake and a wimp. Engage in serious discussion or continue to be laughed at.
 
It is a common sense argument that nukes should be limited. Your ideology would end humanity. If homicidal maniacs were given access to nukes, like they are these rifles, it would be over.

you must concede that there is absolutely zero probability that, even in the absolute worst of circumstances, the US Government would never use a nuke on it's own populace, on it's own soil. right?
 
you must concede that there is absolutely zero probability that, even in the absolute worst of circumstances, the US Government would never use a nuke on it's own populace, on it's own soil. right?

Its unlikely, but it is an abridgement of the right to bear arms to limit them.
 
Back
Top