Many American White Men Worship Guns Because of Sexual Insecurity, Entitlement, and P

if regulation infringes upon the right, it's unconstitutional. end of story. there are very few 'regulations' that can be done that would not infringe on the right. an example would be concealed carry. if that regulation wants to ban concealed carry, it at least still lets people open carry. that would be considered reasonable. regulating who can carry via permits is an infringement, therefore unreasonable.

"The right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." Where does it say anything about regulation? The regulation I support doesn't mean giving up your guns.
 
I went to the SF Giants opening day today. Started drinking at 10:00am Friday morning. It is now 12:44am Saturday morning. I'm not sure if I should be happy I've drinken for over 12 hours straight and can somewhat still continue to type. I'm suppose to get up in a few hours and play golf. I think I may really hurt. I have issues. As the wife would say "bless your heart".

If I get a chance I would like to clarify what I was attempting to say in that one post. I don't think it came across real well.

ROTFL. "I've drinken..."? You're flagged!
 
If you're going to be pedantic, where does it say "the right to keep 30-round magazines, etc."?

Keep your guns, you just can't have ammo.

yeah because that isn't against the spirit of the law at all.

how about women can vote, but they can only vote for who their husband votes for.

they still have the right to vote! what's the problem?
 
yeah because that isn't against the spirit of the law at all.

how about women can vote, but they can only vote for who their husband votes for.

they still have the right to vote! what's the problem?

Stockpile as many of these as you like, no problem.

Cannonball.jpg


images
 
Stockpile as many of these as you like, no problem.

Cannonball.jpg


images

i see you dodged your poorly placed logic.

as for your new post, musket balls actually have less accuracy than modern day bullets, so musket balls would in fact be more dangerous. secondly it's clear that the 2nd amendment was in place to prevent tyranny, and to act as a defense for ones own agency. that could not be accomplished today with musketballs.

sorry christie, but you are just a constitutional traitor. move to canada and get the fuck out.
 
guns are one of the most important issues in america. They protect our freedom from tyranny, and on a personal level can make a 80 year old grandma more powerful than some thug. They are the protectors of agency.

If you don't mind guns so long as they aren't used on innocents, why are you trying to punish the vast majority of gun owners that are responsible citizens?

You have a persecution complex, I am surprised you aren't religious.
 
If you're going to be pedantic, where does it say "the right to keep 30-round magazines, etc."?

Keep your guns, you just can't have ammo.


LOL...show me where it says "guns".

All I see is a right to bear ARMS.

Everyone's got two and the 2nd amendment clearly states the Government can't take them away from you!
 
"The right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." Where does it say anything about regulation? The regulation I support doesn't mean giving up your guns.

If the word was "denied," then you would have a point about silly regulations (oddly enough, the term applied to militias). Instead, they used the must more radical and interesting term "infringed."
 
"The right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." Where does it say anything about regulation? The regulation I support doesn't mean giving up your guns.

Ummm ever word in the sentence says that? If you want to change it, we have a process. It's called Article 5 of the Constitution. Been used more than a few times.
 
You have a persecution complex, I am surprised you aren't religious.

lol...I thought you said percussion....(think about it)

I see Ken has decided to put his sheer faggery on display yet again...

WTF? Competition? I'll slap that bitch!

LOL...show me where it says "guns".

All I see is a right to bear ARMS.

Everyone's got two and the 2nd amendment clearly states the Government can't take them away from you!

Yeah...I already told the idiot to keep his arms and legs and turn in his guns. :) Dimwits!

Dixie and ILA also have a decent track record to that end.

And trainwrecks get a lot of attention. Your point is?
 
You have a persecution complex, I am surprised you aren't religious.

how do you feel about pro-lifers talking about what you can do with your own body?

gun rights are very similar in a lot of respects, because guns allow people to protect their bodies from harm. They ensure the individuals freedom and help people maintain agency over themselves.

Why the fuck would I not be mad when christie keeps coming into threads making obviously disingenuous arguments and is being deliberately obtuse?

She smugly says we can have guns, just not ammo. What purpose does that serve in this conversation? Does she truly believe such an argument is an honest one, one that doesn't violate the spirit of the second amendment? Do I really have to explain why such an insinuation is absurd?

Then she claims we can have musketballs to protect ourselves, as if the 2nd amendment was only meant to be about 18th century weapons and nothing else.

So yeah, in addition to all the valid reasons to have guns, I take issue with christies continual obtuse and disingenuous debate tactics.
 
And the 1A only applies to quill pens and leaded ink. Changes in technology don't equal changes in freedom you Tyranical America hater.

yes exactly. christies absurd logic is complete bullshit. It's the exact equivalent that free speech only applies to standing on the street or printing pamphlets, but the government has the right to shut down tv broadcasts, and anything you say on the internet.
 
how do you feel about pro-lifers talking about what you can do with your own body?

gun rights are very similar in a lot of respects, because guns allow people to protect their bodies from harm. They ensure the individuals freedom and help people maintain agency over themselves.

Why the fuck would I not be mad when christie keeps coming into threads making obviously disingenuous arguments and is being deliberately obtuse?

She smugly says we can have guns, just not ammo. What purpose does that serve in this conversation? Does she truly believe such an argument is an honest one, one that doesn't violate the spirit of the second amendment? Do I really have to explain why such an insinuation is absurd?

Then she claims we can have musketballs to protect ourselves, as if the 2nd amendment was only meant to be about 18th century weapons and nothing else.

So yeah, in addition to all the valid reasons to have guns, I take issue with christies continual obtuse and disingenuous debate tactics.

Remember when she said reasonable compromise? Yeah, I haven't seen any on her part either.
 
I'll sit down to the table of "Reasonable compromise" when they stop with pure propaganda by using terms like "assault weapons" and trying to conflate that to mean assault rifles.
 
Back
Top