Right? He took his whiny butt to Reddit last I heard. Good riddance.
Brave armed patriot foils robbery attempt
- Thread starter GatorTheo
- Start date
You have to put stuff like that in writing, and even then, people like you still try to ignore it. Once again the bill of rights restricts government, not me.
Why don't we repeal the 1st amendment, how would you feel about that? Or hey, nobody is trying to quarter soldiers in your home, let's get rid of the 3rd.
Inalienable rights, citizens rights, natural rights regardless of what you call them they are rights that can't be taken away by government. luckily we live in America, with a constitution and a bill of rights and not Australia which has neither.
SHALL NOT BE INFRINGEDYou've inadvertently stumbled onto the truth.
The constitution doesn't affect your opinion on guns so there's no reason for you, or people like you, to use it to defend guns.
You like guns because you like guns. You don't care what the constitution says.
I LOVE what the Constitution says about the second
Education time again for you. Until the Constitution is legally changed, it has to be followed. Secondly, you have ZERO clues about what they knew or did not know. So since the snowflake communists like yourself are unable to chance the 2nd, SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED is still the law of the day. And this education for you has been completed!
Last edited:
Most gun owners are very good with their guns and the laws. They never go looking for trouble and use their weapons only for protection. We are not on offense we are on defense.
This zealot has a different mindset and deserves to go to prison. He murdered that young man plain and simple.
Still not certain why you would post this and show pleasure in the kid being killed with your comments.
Because he is deathly afraid of guns, and wants them removed from society. Like all libs do
THX. I don't spend much time in this forum, so I do not know everyone's pet peeves and idiosyncrasies - except MDFGator, who flames with the best of them.
But they aren't good flames, he mostly flings handfuls of poo and hopes some sticks.
By flame I meant "Flaming Liberal". It is an old guy term from back in the day. He may not actually be a card-carrying member of the liberal establishment, but his TDS is so high/bad that he is a lib to me.
my apologies I thought you meant insults in the best traditions of the message board.
he is awesome at insulting others also. When data is lacking libs always resort to insults.
calling a liberal a lib is far from childish name calling - lib is simply short for liberal. Just an FYI. Now, "Flaming Liberal" may be pushing the envelope just a bit, but it is an adjective for a person with a strong liberal bias. Enjoy the weekend Theo
Not it's not. The 2A doesn't limit the type of weapon you can have. It's VERY clear.
You could own cannons during the Revolutionary war. Got something more powerful than a cannon that's still sold today?
And the Federal gov't has already heavily restricted certain types of weapons, such a automatic rifles.
Lastly, the supposition that the FF's would have put in restrictions if they knew "how powerful" today's guns are is ignorant AF. The ENTIRE REASON for it being the second amendment (and not the 12th) was the prevention of tyranny. You can't do that with a pea shooter. They would have likely be against ANY Federal restrictions on firearm type, as the more powerful the firearm the better it is at achieving the intended goal.
He didn't call you stupid and slow. He said this is "for the stupid and the slow".
We can all assume that doesn't apply to you, right?
You can still own a cannon without how so much as a how do you do to BATFE.
My main point is this…if you think the FF’s would have restricted firearms based on their “power” you don’t know history…their frame of mind when they wrote the founding documents.
Similar threads
