In before the gun confiscation NUTS.....
- Thread starter Capt Ron 1
- Start date
Me, acting the fool on a messageboard? Now I'm offended!
@mods, boo hoo, please punish my opponents.
That's exactly what it means, in an effort to secure the security of the state you can have the firepower required to do just that.
Let me ask you another way - if they only wanted to let us have guns as a cursory right, then why did they mention the establishment of a militia capable of securing a free state? Why put that in if the intent was 2 bolt action .22 cal rifles?
Of course. Because we're all making the same argument.
I don't think they intended to limit it to two guns. I'm just saying they could limit it to two guns and still not be infringing on your right to bear arms.
Bumped because it's good for the libs here to actually read the Constitution for once.
If they tried, they would be sued. The case would then likely be bucked up to the Supreme Court for a ruling.
The Supreme Court would rule that the Constitution doesn't limit the number of guns you can own.
Our government at work. It always amuses me how the liberals have no idea how it operates, yet they demand that it become bigger and bigger.
Back to the issue of gun violence, which @GatorTheo claims to care about:
If an area is designated a Gun Free Zone, such as a school or hospital, does that designation increase or decrease the chance of gun violence happening in that designated zone?
If an area is designated a Gun Free Zone, such as a school or hospital, does that designation increase or decrease the chance of gun violence happening in that designated zone?
Nah! He got knocked TFO by Argyle, the limo driver.
"Gun free zones" are mostly worthless. You'll never keep guns out of small areas that are surrounded by scores of guns.
It's like designating an area of a hospital to be a disease-free zone.
Based on this thread? It's pretty obvious our liberals have no idea what the Constitution says or means.
So more guns in Gun Free Zones would decrease gun violence there?
Sorry, I really don't pay much attention to Theos in general. Didn't Family Ties have a black Theo as a neighbor or something? Theos are pretty much forgettable from what I can remember.
Answer the question.
why did they mention the establishment of a militia capable of securing a free state? Why put that in
You still don't know the definition of infringed? How is that possible?
If you limit, you are infringing. You cannot limit without infringing.
There's simply no way that you don't know this by now.
And this thread and board appears to be pretty much in line with what I see from liberals elsewhere. Liberals in general once care about the application of rights, laws or rules when they benefit from said application. Otherwise, they want them to be applied or denied to their opponents as they see fit to their advantage.
He knows it, and he's eliminating the part of the amendment (let alone the historical context in which it was drafted) that gets in the way of his "2 guns is bearing arms" straw man.
The other side of a debate doesn't have to concede to lose. When they keep saying the same thing over and over, refuse to answer questions and start calling names it becomes obvious.
I mean....is his home life really this boring? No stable person would invest this much time and energy into trolling. Especially when everyone knows they are trolling. Is he truly this desperate for attention?
Guess who the real cultists are? The climate cultists, the baby killing cultists, the socialist cultists and the chronic liar cultists!The left as a whole keeps parroting the word “cultist”. It’s really odd that an entire segment of society has been infected with this verbiage like it’s covid. Very choreographed, Almost like…
I guess racist, sexist, conspiracy theorists….were no longer working.
What will the next ist be?
Libs do not agree with this. They love uncle sugar taking care of them, because most are below average people and need it.
It certainly appears that way.
Won't answer any of my tough questions and I'm still waiting on the details on that proposal to have everyone register their guns and take an exam to see if they get to keep them.
Anyway, the season is getting long in the tooth. I'm going to ride my Glock home to pick up my youngest for a quick 9 holes before it gets dark. Luckily I registered it and I passed the gov't test!
Have a good night guys.
Ladies and gentlemen, your new Gun Czar:
https://www.foxnews.com/media/conservatives-congratulate-harris-gun-czar-border-role
https://www.foxnews.com/media/conservatives-congratulate-harris-gun-czar-border-role
Of course, it's election season. They want to fundraise off kooky libs that believe you can stop gun violence by focusing on the law-abiding gun owners.
You know....the people that account for 0% of gun violence.
People of your mindset fuel this nonsense.
I have to give Biden credit on this one. He's named one of the finest minds of our time to solve one of the worst problems of our time. I can't wait to see the results of her work.
I cannot imagine watching innocents get pummeled by the scum of our society, beat down by fists, feet, clubs or stabbed with knives, if not shot with guns that are illegally owned by the perpetrators way more often than not, and then after seeing that repeatedly, they call for gun control.
...gun control that only law abiding citizens would even consider complying with. Can someone make this make sense to me?
...gun control that only law abiding citizens would even consider complying with. Can someone make this make sense to me?
This is on display in EVERY large lib city already. But you need to add that then they get let out of jail because the democrats refuse to prosecute them...then you are 100% accurate.
What percentage of people want to take away all of your guns? I looked briefly and couldn't find that answer.
The entire democrat party and their brainless followers
Is that what the gun companies told you? If you'll look around on your own, I think you'll find that not to be true.
It's amazing he can't see that.
Without @GatorTheo and emotional people like him acting irrationally, there would be no gun violence problem in America. Gun companies couldn't stay in business.
Gun companies love theo. He keeps them in record profits. Without him, all decision making around this issue would be left to the logical thinkers who would solve the problem using common sense and what's best for society as a whole.
Which would result in less gun violence, and more safety for all. But the gun companies wouldn't make as much money. That's where people like theo come in. Add his emotional outbursts to the mix, and suddenly the issue is reframed to we have to persecute the law-abiding gun owners. The people that contribute to 0% of the gun violence in America.
That reframing takes the focus off criminals, and reframes the gun-abiding gun owners as being in the wrong. Politicians seize on the emotional outbursts of people like theo, and they appoint 'gun violence czars' to further target the law-abiding gun owners who are contributing to 0% of gun violence.
As we see ITT, theo celebrates this happening.
Theo is literally contributing to the problem he claims to want to solve. Either this is another weak troll attempt, or he's the most gullible poster here...and that's saying something with this crowd.
Obfuscate all you like, your "answer" is gun control.
Short of storm trooping into every home, barn, shed and dugout in the US, I'm not sure how you'd get that done. And moreover, I don't know why you'd want to when what we need is more responsibile and trained people carrying guns.
When is the last time a democrat told you that he did NOT favor restricting gun ownership? I've never met one in my life, have you?
