Why It's Good To Be A Liberal

This message is hidden because Southern Man is on your ignore list.
Mick Jager's lips calle, said southern gaylord flapps his gums too much.
 
SmarterThanYou said:
I call bullshit.

why do liberals prohibit me from buying a machine gun manufactured after may 19, 1986? why do liberals believe that my right to free speech, firearms ownership, privacy, and equal protection under the law are not absolute but their right to feel safe is?
Click to expand...


Because you have no legitimate need for a machine gun, which is a militsry weapon designed to sweep the street clean of uniformed adversaries, soldiers of an enemy state. There is no equivalent civilian use. It's not appropriate for target-shooting, as its accuracy sucks, with the recoil pulling up and to the right
on full auto. It's not appropriate for hunting, as it increases the risk of another hunter, backpacker, or camper catching a stray round. Too much chance of collateral damage, and beside that, as Barry Goldwater once said, "If you can't drop a deer with a single shot, you don't belong in the woods with a rifle." And don't even try to use the second amendment as providing a mans by which citizens can overthrow the allegedly tyrannical, socialist, nazi, communist federal government. This is an elected government, not a tyranny. Majority rule is not tyranny when the president fals all over himself to bring the opposition party into the debate, by discarding important parts of his policy to entice them, and they swat his hand away, stick out their lower lips like a bunch of fucking three-year-olds who are way overdue for a wood shampoo, and petulantly shout, "NO!!", with a stamp of their little untied blue tennis shoes. Some tyranny. if you don't like the direction the country is taking, vote the fuckers out, but don't bitch when you vote stupidly for a once respected and independent-minded Senator who became a hack and a forehead kissing brown nose planting one on the frat-rat punk whose campaign lied about him in the 2000 SC primary. McCain was sucking up to a guy he should have been sticking a shiv into. Then he compounds it by choosing a completely unqualified, ignorant, lying, sociopathic bimbo as his running mate,and you knuckle-dragging morons vote for this bullshit special, because you can't stand the thought of a black man in the white house, and you are so clueless, you can't understand why your side got its head handed to it. Then you whine about tyranny when the super majority on the other side starts pushing the agenda they were voted into office to pursue. Your party's leaders pout that the d/ems aren't being bipartisan, when during the period you held power, your party defined bipartisan as, "Our way or the highway." Now that you were run out of town ona rail, you insist that GOP positions be included in bills despite the wholesale rejection of those policies by the voters. This is not tyranny, and the founders (Jefferson) did not intend the second be used to violently overthrow the republic they had created, just because you disagreed with the winners' agenda. The purpose of the second amendment is th edefense of the state: "A well-regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to bear arms shall not be infringed." You want to bear a flintlock, single-shot, Brown Bess rifle for your free state's well-regulated militia, have at it.


But Fuck your childish whining, "I want my machine gun, and I want it now. I'm going to hold my breath and turn blue. Then you'll be sorry." I'm not free unless i have my machine gun."

Get real. The rest of us aren't going to let right-wing retards have fucking machine guns. You'll either shoot your eye out, or shoot one of our eyes out, or some psycopathic redneck crystal meth head will steal the damn thing, and then we're all fucked.
 
zoombwaz said:
Because you have no legitimate need for a machine gun,
Click to expand...
A right is a right, regardless of what you claim a legitimate use is. Further, he has plenty of legitimate uses for one, not the least of which is defense against a tyrannical state
which is a militsry weapon designed to sweep the street clean of uniformed adversaries, soldiers of an enemy state. There is no equivalent civilian use. It's not appropriate for target-shooting, as its accuracy sucks, with the recoil pulling up and to the right
on full auto.
Click to expand...
Clearly you've never fired a machine gun before. They can be plenty accurate.
It's not appropriate for hunting, as it increases the risk of another hunter, backpacker, or camper catching a stray round. Too much chance of collateral damage, and beside that, as Barry Goldwater once said, "If you can't drop a deer with a single shot, you don't belong in the woods with a rifle."
Click to expand...
Lovely, but where in the constitution is hunting mentioned? No where? That's what I thought.
And don't even try to use the second amendment as providing a mans by which citizens can overthrow the allegedly tyrannical, socialist, nazi, communist federal government. This is an elected government, not a tyranny. Majority rule is not tyranny when the president fals all over himself to bring the opposition party into the debate...
Click to expand...
Hitler was democratically elected. Or was he not a tyrant?
This is not tyranny, and the founders (Jefferson) did not intend the second be used to violently overthrow the republic they had created
Click to expand...
Actually, yeah, they did. All their writings confirmed it.
The purpose of the second amendment is th edefense of the state: "A well-regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to bear arms shall not be infringed." You want to bear a flintlock, single-shot, Brown Bess rifle for your free state's well-regulated militia, have at it.
Click to expand...
So by that assertion freedom of speech only applies to quill pens?


Get real. The rest of us aren't going to let right-wing retards have fucking machine guns. You'll either shoot your eye out, or shoot one of our eyes out, or some psycopathic redneck crystal meth head will steal the damn thing, and then we're all fucked.
Click to expand...
Plenty of people already own machine guns (along with other lovely firearms). No incidents so far. Nice rage though, that's sure to get you far. Keep arguing emotion against hard, cold, emotionless facts.
 
Last edited:
zoombwaz said:
Admission of mental defect in far too many words.
Click to expand...

Rights are rights fool. You may not respect other people's rights to own certain firearms, but your personal "judgement" is not the rule of the day on who gets to do what. As for majority rule, just remember that Hitler was democratically elected, and legally made into a dictator.

Madison and Franklin both wrote about their fear of the "tyranny of the majority." If you are a political minority, and your rights are being denied to you by the majority, then you are being tyranized.
 
Threedee said:
Rights are rights fool. You may not respect other people's rights to own certain firearms, but your personal "judgement" is not the rule of the day on who gets to do what. As for majority rule, just remember that Hitler was democratically elected, and legally made into a dictator.

Madison and Franklin both wrote about their fear of the "tyranny of the majority." If you are a political minority, and your rights are being denied to you by the majority, then you are being tyranized.
Click to expand...
Damn right.
 
Caboose said:
A right is a right, regardless of what you claim a legitimate use is. Further, he has plenty of legitimate uses for one, not the least of which is defense against a tyrannical state Clearly you've never fired a machine gun before. They can be plenty accurate. Lovely, but where in the constitution is hunting mentioned? No where? That's what I thought. Hitler was democratically elected. Or was he not a tyrant? Actually, yeah, they did. All their writings confirmed it. So by that assertion freedom of speech only applies to quill pens?




Plenty of people already own machine guns (along with other lovely firearms). No incidents so far. Nice rage though, that's sure to get you far. Keep arguing emotion against hard, cold, emotionless facts.
Click to expand...

A specious argument at best. In the first place, until the asinine recent ruling that overturned 200 years of precedent, the second amendment had never, at any level of the federal judiciary, been interpreted as having anything to do with private gun ownership. For the federal courts, the significant clause in the second amendment was the first clause, "A well-regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to bear arms shall not be infringed." Which part of the qualifying first clause do you not comprehend? Oh, and the reason the second amendment doesn't mention hunting is that it was never intended to cover private ownership of weapons.

Hitler was not an elected tyrant, pinhead. He was elected chancellor. He became a tyrant when he seized power after the suspicious burning of the Reichstag and the subsequent dissolution of the German parliament. If you're going to draw historical parallels, try to make sure they aren't moronic and irrelevant. Our laws are still written by an elected congress, not a single tyrant. Hitler, my ass.

Finally, this beauty: "So by that assertion freedom of speech only applies to quill pens?" Freedom of speech doesn't require any kind pen, jackass, just the ability to speak/communicate.
 
The first clause is meaningless in the face of "shall not be infringed," but if you accept that a militia is necessary, and you understand how the Founding Fathers defined militia (all free adult citizens), then you begin to understand the 2nd Amendment more precisely.
 
Caboose said:
Damn right.
Click to expand...

Okay, morons. Quickly, which of your rights are being violated by the current majority? None. So STFU. You have no right that states you must be pleased by or happy with all bills passed. In fact the First amendment, in conjunction with majority rule pretty much guarantees you'll be pissed off, and your ignorance and stupidity in voting for the blatantly lying assholes you consistently elect to represent you seals the deal. You are doomed by your own inability to grasp reality to being perpetually pissed off and pissed on. But don't even start with your whining about how your rights are being violated by a tyrannical majority unless you can actually delineate which rights they are.

In the words of the Eagles: "I'd like to find your inner child and kick its little ass. Get over it!"
 
zoombwaz said:
Okay, morons. Quickly, which of your rights are being violated by the current majority? None. So STFU. You have no right that states you must be pleased by or happy with all bills passed. In fact the First amendment, in conjunction with majority rule pretty much guarantees you'll be pissed off, and your ignorance and stupidity in voting for the blatantly lying assholes you consistently elect to represent you seals the deal. You are doomed by your own inability to grasp reality to being perpetually pissed off and pissed on. But don't even start with your whining about how your rights are being violated by a tyrannical majority unless you can actually delineate which rights they are.

In the words of the Eagles: "I'd like to find your inner child and kick its little ass. Get over it!"
Click to expand...
We can only thank the good lord above Zoom that they don't even know what tyranny is.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top