In before the gun confiscation NUTS.....
- Thread starter Capt Ron 1
- Start date
REALLY. ONE is bearing ARMS? I guess you failed 8th grade english? ARMS is PLURAL.
That's why I said it. I wasn't sure if you needed two weapons to be 'bearing arms' or not.
At any rate, the constitution doesn't say your "right to bear unlimited arms shall not be infringed" so, if you have 2 (or maybe even 1) weapon, you are good to go.
Thanks but that's not up to you to decide. It rests with the Constitution and the individual.
Right. I'm taking the constitution literally. You can be limited to one or two guns constitutionally.
It does not regulate how many. Your WEAK interpretation I could not give 2 chits about. Constitutionally...you can own 10,000 guns
Right. Where does it literally say in the Constitution that if you own 2 guns your Right to Bear Arms is satisfied and there's no need to buy a 3rd gun?
LOLOLOLOL PLEASE...show us ANYWHERE in our Constitution. Are you DMS sock account also?
...the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
If you have two guns, you are 'bearing arms', right?
So, if I don't let you buy a third gun, I have not infringed on your right to bear arms......you're already bearing arms.
It does not say your 'right to bear unlimited arms shall not be infringed'.
That's exactly what you have done.
The Constitution does not place a limit on how many guns you can own.
Or on how many tears you can shed over my right to own as many guns as I want.
If you are taking it literally, then show me where it imposes limits.
Yes. Same as if I bear 50, or 2000. The great thing is our founders didn’t limit it, but allowed for multiples.
It only gives your the right to 'bear arms', agree?
If you have two guns, are you 'bearing arms'?
Does it say you have the right to bear 50 or 2000 arms?
If I promise to give you free cheeseburgers and I give you two free cheeseburgers, I have totally fulfilled my promise.
Yep. And if you refuse to sell me a 3rd gun, you are infringing on my Constitutional Rights. You said you want to take the Constitution literally, but it literally places no limits on how many guns you can buy.
What an amazing life.
Actually you haven't. You never promised that I couldn't get a 3rd cheeseburger. If I ask for one and you refuse to give it, you are engaging in false advertising, and can be sued. That's why companies state a limit for giveaways such as your hypothetical.
Does it say I don’t?
Does the first amendment say I can only speak freely twice?
By your standard, you are done posting freely for the rest of your life. The first amendment has fulfilled it’s obligation.
Your constitutional right is only to 'bear arms'. If you have two guns, you are 'bearing arms'.
If I wanted to infringe your right to bear arms, I would let you have any (or maybe just one, depending on how you look at it).
Imagine doing this 16 hours a day for over 20 years.
My Constitutional rights do not limit how many guns I can buy.
You have used your right to speak. You are done now sir. Please kindly return your right now.
I'm sorry I interjected facts that undermined your very weak troll attempt.
I wonder how many additional guns have been sold because of gun crazies like @GatorTheo? That's the true irony here.
There is a reason John Kasich never got the nod. There is also a reason Theo voted for the Establishment hack Kasich.
ITT, we get full understanding of the intellect of a Kasich, Mitt, Jeb, and Mitch supporter.
In 1776, If it were up to Theo, we would all be shining the boots of the King of England in 2023. He Loves him some government control.
ITT, we get full understanding of the intellect of a Kasich, Mitt, Jeb, and Mitch supporter.
In 1776, If it were up to Theo, we would all be shining the boots of the King of England in 2023. He Loves him some government control.
Ask Hussein Obama..the #1 gun salesperson on the planet
@GatorTheo doesn't want to buy a gun, so he doesn't care if he loses that right. Hell he'd probably feel safer if no one had that right.
What he can't see, or what he doesn't care to see, is that if you allow the left to take one Constitutional Right, they will take them all.
For instance, the Constitution affords both Theo and myself the right to a speedy public trial. I've never had to exercise that right, but I can appreciate the severity of the Jan6th defendants being denied that right.
Theo apparently cannot. His vision is apparently limited to what affects him today. If he doesn't feel like he is affected today if everyone loses a Constitutional Right, then why should he care?
Why indeed.
I have, and will continue to say….
The “moderates” are the real extremist in this country. They continue to do more damage to the Republic than any other group. Because they call themselves something they are not, and their views get attached to other groups.
Lets not forget that the moderates gave us George Bush, The Patriot Act, weapons of mass destruction, Mccain and the Mccain cronyism in AZ that allowed for election fraud, and Bush cronyism in Texas. Just to name a couple
That fails to include Mitt, Mitch, And others with the massive amount of damage they have done…..in the name of the Right.
If you are a moderate in 2023, you are also asleep in 2023.
You asked for it so here it is..."shall not be infringed."
